BX 



0^. 



1 <^ ^> 




^^^^ 




PHILOSOPHY 



SKEPTICISM m riTEAISM, 



THE OPI^'IOXS OF EEY. THEODOEE PAEKEE. AXD OTHEE 
WEITEE3 AliE SHOWN TO BE INCOXSISTEXT WITH 
SOUXD EE AS OX AND THE CHEISTIAN 
EELIGIOX. 



BY JAMES B. WALKER, 

AITTHOE OF "THE PHFLOSOPnY OF TIIE PLA^ OF SALVATI02^," 
BEVEALED IN HIE PROCESS OF CBE^^TIOX AXD BY THE 
MAN'IFESTATIOX OF CimiST," ETC. 



NEW YORK: 
DEEBY & JACKSOX, 119 NASSAU STEEET. 
CIXCIXXATI: RICKET, MAEEORT & WEBB. 
CHICAGO: D. B. COOKE & CO. 

1857. 



Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1857, toy 
DERBY & JACKSON, 
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court, for the Southern District of New York. 



STEREOTYPED BY 
T H O MAS B. SMITH, 

82 &, 84 Beekman-st. 



PRINTED BY 
GEO. RUSSELL & CO., 

61 Beekman-st. 



TO 



|rof. ^totof, f Iico^ou larlur, |a5fplr §:irlier 

AND TO ALL THINKERS, 

WHETHER THEY BE 

CHRISTIAX, SCEPTIC, OR TtEPPiOBATE, 



IS MOST RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED 
BY THE AUTHOR. 



CONTENTS. 



LETTEE L 

PAGE. 

The Nonsense of Theodore Parker's Theological Philoso- 
phy 11 

LETTER II. 

Yariatioxs and Incongruities in the Theological Opinions 
of Me, Parker and other Transcendentalists 23 

LETTER IIL 

Misstatements op Orthodox Opinions 31 

LETTER lY. 

The Peesonalitt of God 41 

LETTER Y. 

The Tri-unity of the Divine MmD 61 

LETTER YI. 

Human Depravity 80 

LETTER Yn. 

At-one-ment ; OR, Reconciliation with God 99 ■ 



vi CONTENTS. 

LETTER Yin. 



Future Reteebuticn' 119 

LETTER JX. 

Rational Exposition of Probation and Retribution 140 

LETTER X. 

Refutation of Common Fallacies on the Subject of Fu- 
ture Retribution 161 

LETTER XL - 
Reformers and their Relation to Christianity 115 

LETTER XIL 

A Discrimination between the Good and Evil in Modern 
Reformers 188 

LETTER XIIL 

"Written Revelation a Necessity in order to tb^ Moral 
Development and Moral Progress of Mankind 213 



LETTER XIY. 
Revelation the Motive-power in Human Progress 234 



Appendix 



273 



PREFACE. 



In the following pages the author has endeavored to 
meet, in a popular form, some of the prevailing moral 
fallacies of the times. 

It is admitted by every one who has observed the 
state of public opinion in relation to moral and religious 
questions, that no inconsiderable portion of the business 
men of our cities and villages — especially the young 
men — are influenced by opinions which are inconsistent 
both with sound reason and with revelation. This lit- 
tle volume is an .endeavor to biiag back some who 
have wandered, to a rational apprehension of religious 
doctrine and duty. 

It asks the forbearance of the dogmatic theologian. 
The effort of the author is to give the rationale of the 
Christian doctrines which he discusses. Those for whom 
these letters are mostly designed have chosen reason, 
rather than revelation, as arbiter in matters of faith. 
We have, therefore, permitted reason to speak freely 
in behalf of revealed truth, and to speak sometimes in 



viii 



PREFACE. 



forms of language that we would not use with those 
who are believers in divine revelation. 

We have, in the discussion, waived all questions not 
involved ua the main issues, and have granted to the 
opposers and accusers of the evangelical ministry all 
that a fair mind can ask ; and as the skeptics of our 
day claim a philosophical basis for many of their opin- 
ions, we have endeavored to meet them on their own 
ground. 

One of the volumes of Rev. Theodore Parker (Dis- 
courses of Religion) was put into our hands by a friend. 
We read it, and were surprised to find a book strong 
in phrase and assuming in rhetoric ; but without con- 
gruity, and, as it seemed to us, out of harmony both 
with reason and revelation. 

With this view of the book, we commenced a series 
of letters to a friend, one of which was pubhshed in a 
religious journal. .Other letters were written, but not 
published. In those letters we referred, in two or 
three instances, to portions of two volumes previously 
published, and to which our respondent had access. 
For the benefit of those who may possess these volumes, 
we have given references, or condensed the thought 
and put it into another form. 

These letters, with some additional matter and a few 
notes, are now submitted to the public. They are re- 
spectfully commended to the consideration of those 



PREFACE. 



ix 



who desire to act sincerely and intelligently in relation 
to the matters in question. " Prove aH things : hold 
fast that which is good," is a Scripture precept. 

The matter of some of the letters has been prepared 
in haste. The discussion covers the hving issues of 
our times between the friends and opponents of evan- 
gelical Christianity. The style is as popular as the 
character of the subjects would permit. If it shall an* 
swer the ends of a hand-book on the subject of heter- 
odoxy in religion and reform, the author's aim will be 
accomplished. 



LETTEE I. 



NONSENSE OF THEODORE PARKER'S THEOLOGICAL 
PHILOSOPHY. 

My Dear Sir: 

I learned to respect you for yonr learning 
and talents in by-gone years. When I first knew 
you I doubted concerning the divine legation of 
Moses and the manifestation of God in Christ. 
Since then you have departed in some measure 
from the faith which you then commended to me. 

It has been matter of sincere regret to myself and 
others that a friend, who we believe possesses one 
of the best minds in the land, should no longer act 
with us in advancing the plan of Christ in the 
world. But whatever may be your convictions in 
relation to the divine nature of Jesus, it surprises 
me most of all to be informed that you listen with 
apparent complacency to the teachings of Theodore 
Parker on the subject of Theism. Whatever re- 
gard you may have for Mr. Parker as a man and 
a reformer — a regard which I likewise cherish — 



12 Parker's theological philosophy. 



still I am sure you can see little but a verbiage, 
something like Carlyleism diluted, in the style and 
matter of Mr. Parker's teaching. I confess that I 
can not see how any one who prizes the logical fac- 
ulty so highly as you do, should have any respect 
for such a book as the Discourses of Eeligion," 
which has scarcely a reliable logical process from its 
beginning to its close. 

I think you injure the character of your country- 
men in the estimation of thinking men, both at 
home and abroad, by the sanction which a dis- 
criminating American scholar may seem to give to 
the vagaries of such a writer as Mr. Parker. 

The course pursued by other gentlemen in rela- 
tion to Mr. Parker as a public teacher, differs, in 
my opinion, morally, from the same course when 
pursued by yourself. Men who have little or no 
knowledge of the Scriptures, and who afl&liate 
mostly with those who reject the authority of God 
in Christ, if they have sagacity to see the defection 
from Christian principle which exists about them, 
may be expected to swell the paean which hails the 
anti-scriptural reformer. 

But should any apparent defections in some por- 
tions of the Christian church lead such men as you 
to reject Christian principle ? 



paekee's theological philosophy. 13 



You answer by saving that, ^' When Parker has 
the courage to denounce statesmen who prostitute 
their great talents, and become recreant to the prin- 
ciples of freedom and humanity ; and when Greeley 
has the courage to sustain the denouncement, 
although it is against his own party — or rather 
against a self- degraded man who was the Magnus 
Apollo of his own party — the man," you say, 
"whose better nature does not sympathize with such 
devotion to principle, while it reluctates against 
those venal ministers and presses that are silent, 
or become the apologists for theological or political 
sinners, has no letter nature,'''' 

I have, you know, no desire to abate any thing 
from the homage which you pay to the moral cour- 
age of reformers. I only regret that the class of 
men to whom you refer should reject the faith 
which alone can give a right spirit and final suc-^ 
cess to their efforts. So long as they reject Christ \ 
as the model and motive, they will themselves 
grow more selfish, and their constant failures will 
make them misanthropes in the end. 

So far, then, as Mr. Parker and other teachers 
and lecturers of his class get indorsement from 
you^ there is ground for that blame which always 
attaches to those who hnow when they sanction the 



14 Parker's theological philosophy. 



transfer of a valueless or injurious article to tliose 
who do not 'know. 

There are many men — ^young men especially — 
who have paid little or no attention to the grave 
matters which Mr. Parker ^Halks about," and who 
no doubt suppose that his scholastic words and 
phrases upon theological subjects have profound 
truth and significance in them. You know better, 
and should not therefore give, even by silent ac- 
quiescence, countenance to teachings which must 
be an offense to your intelligence if not to your 
conscience. 

Allow me here to note for you some passages in 
Mr. Parker's Discourses of Eeligion." They will 
sufl&ciently indicate the character of his theologiz- 
ing, and warrant any language which may seem to 
you or others to be severe in the foregoing para- 
graphs : 

1. THE ^'sentiment" OF GOD. 

Mr. Parker says (p. 18), The religious sentiment 
does not disclose the character, and much less the 
nature and object, on which it depends." 

Again (p. 27), The sentiment of Ood^ though 
vague and mysterious, is always the same in it- 
self." 



Parker's theological philosophy. 



15 



2. THE ^^IDEA" of god. 

On page 24 we are told that tlie idea of God 
comes of the joint and spontaneous action of 
reason and tlie religions sentiment." 

Again (p. 27), ^' The idea of God as a fact given 
in man's nature, and affording a consistent repre- 
sentation of its object, is permanent and alike in 
all." 

But (p. 24) we are told that The idea of God is 
perfect only when the conditions are complied 
with" — but, in a majority of cases, the conditions 
are not complied with." 

3. THE conception" OF GOD. 

Page 24. *'The conception of God, as man 
expresses it, is always imperfect." 

Page 27. The conception of God is of the 
most VARIOUS and evanescent character, and is 
not the same in any two ages or men." 

Page 95. The conception which man forms of 
God depends on his character." 

In the above passages the italics are our own, 
introduced to note the points which we shall no- 
tice. The sense is fairly and fully quoted. They 
are " uttered" mostly in the same chapter, and 



16 paeker's theological philosophy. 

♦ 

near the beginning of the book. Taken together, 
their absurdity is equaled only by other ^^intui- 
tions" of like character which follow them in the 
same volume. 

First, we are told that the mind of man has three 
different apprehensions of God, which are spoken 

of: SENTIMENT, IDEA, and CONCEPTION. NoW, if 

we suppose all these to exist at the same time, as 
Mr. Parker evidently does, the notion is a positive 
absurdity. They might exist consecutively, com- 
bined with a doubt which were right ; but that they 
should exist simultaneously as separate appre- 
hensions, is contrary to the laws of mind. 

If they could exist simultaneously, the one ap- 
prehension would nullify the other* One would be 
various and false, the other permanent and true ; 
while a third would be mysterious and always the 
same. 

But if these succeed each other — which is first, 
and which is most influential ? Mr. Parker tells us 
that the conception of God is different in all men, 
and always imperfect. Does this conception" ob- 
literate the idea which is given as a fact in man's 
nature ? Of what benefit is a true idea if it be ob- 
literated in all men (except a few such men as 
Mr. Parker) by a conception which is utterly 



paekee's theological philosophy. 17 



false ? Beside, how can a sentiment — the same in 
all — and an idea which is a fact given in man's na- 
ture, ever be varied or perverted bv a conception 
which is different in all men ? 

This SEXTI^ylEXT, IDEA, and COXCEPTIOX is a 

sort of trinity never before thought of — not a 
trinity in "unity, but a trinity in antagonism exist- 
ing in the same mind. 

If man is conscious of these three different ap- 
prehensions of God, either in connection or in suc- 
cession, why does he not choose one of them ? 
But if the idea is a fact given in his nature, then he 
can not obliterate from his mind a true knowledo-e 

o 

of God. And again, would not the vagueness" of 
the sentiment be dissipated by the definiteness of 
the idea, or the force of the conception ? 

"We are told, on page 24, that the idea of God 
comes of the joint and spontaneous action of rea- 
son and the religious sentiment {a.ction of a senti- 
ment ?), but we are informed, on page 125, that this 
vague and indefinite sentiment, combined with ig- 
norance and fear, leads to superstition. And then, 
on page 188, et seq.^ man can by reason get but an 
imperfect knowledge from nature : yet from a 
vague and mysterious sentiment and imperfect data, 



18 PAEKEE^S THEOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY. 



a Being of wisdom, power, and loye, is derived by 
the reason. 

But strange enough, in immediate connection 
with this, the idea of Grod is said to be a fact 
given in man's nature^ which affords a consistent rep* 
resentation of its objectj PEBMANENT AND ALIKE IJT 
ALL." Thus it is at the same time an intuition, 
given as a fact in man's nature, permanent and 
alike in all, while yet it is the result of a rational 
process, predicated upon a vague sentiment and im- 
perfect data. 

But strange again, we are told in the same chap- 
ter that this idea, which is permanent and alike in 
all, depends upon conditions which, in a majority 
of cases, are not complied with." 

How can a fact which is the same in all, depend 
upon conditions? Or, if the fact be unknown 
until the conditions are complied with, how can 
any man rationally comply with the conditions of 
the unknown ? Mr. Parker must solve such dif- 
ficulties for his friends by intuition. They are 
without the limits of reason. 

But the conception of God, as we have been in- 
formed, is very different from either the sentiment 
or the idea. It is (p. 27) of the most various and 
evanescent character, and is not the same in any two 



PARKER'S THEOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY. 19 



ages or meny This conception of God, we are told, 
" depends on a man's character;" that it is bad or 
good as a man is bad or good ; and that it is 
^'' always imperfectr But subsequently we hear 
something very different of this conception. On 
pp. 156-7, Mr. Parker analyzes it, and finds in the 
evanescent and imperfect conception, which is never 
the same in any two men, what he denominates the 
perfect character of God. He says : "At the end 
of the analysis what is left? — Beixg — Cause — • 
Knowledge — Love — each with no conceivable 
limitations. To express it in a word^ a Being of 
infinite power, wisdom, and goodness. Thus, by 
an analysis of the conception of God, we find in fact, 
or by implication, just what was given synthetic- 
ally by the intuition of the reason." 

Now, as we were taught that the character of the 
conception depends on the character of the man, 
and that it is never the same in any age or in any two 
men^ whose conception has Mr. Parker analyzed? 
And if he finds this result in one case, according 
to his own authority, he will certainly find a dif- 
ferent one in every other case. And as concep- 
tions have an objective origin, how can an analysis 
of a conception give an intuition as its result ? 

But this is not all that Mr. Parker has to teach 



20 Parker's theological philosophy. 



Ms hearers on tlie subject of the divine nature and 
the divine character. Such vagaries as the follow- 
ing occur further on in the same volume : 

Page 151. God can not be personal and con- 
scious as Joseph and Peter, and yet impersonal and 
unconscious as moss," etc. 

Page 159. God is the substantiality of matter!'* 

Page 170. God is the materiality of matter." 

Page 156. God is universal being." 

This is pantheism run mad. If God is substan- 
tial, and material, and universal being, he must be 
developed into all specialities, such as doves and 
snakes,- eagles and alligators, porcupines and pump- 
\ kins. 

Again, page 149. " God is infinite motherli- 
ness," and is im^manent in all things." 

Page 163. The things of nature reflect his 
image, and make real the conception^ Yet the con- 
ception, we are told, is of the most various and 
evanescent character. 

On page 377, we are told that *^we can only 
know God through self;" but, strange to say, the 
contrary of this is likewise true, for on page 392 
we are informed that " there is nothing but self 
between us and God." 

Even these are not the worst passages as speci- 



Parker's theological philosophy. 21 



mens of Parkerism. There are otliers in whicli 
transcendental verbiage becomes worse than ridicu- 
lous. As that on page 140, where it is written^ 
" Nature, which is the outness of God, favors re- 
ligion, which is the inness of man ; and so God works 
with us. Heathens knew it many centuries ago." 

NoW; we affirm that this is not true, and we pos- 
tulate its antagonism thus : Theodore Parker ,\ 
who is the upness of materialism, favors diluted 
moonshine, which is the inness of transcendental- 
ism ; thus mental charlatanism works with us, and 
men of discernment knew it years ago." 

In all the attributes of nonsense, the first para- 
graph is more than a match for the second one. I 
am almost ashamed to put such rhodomontade 
upon paper, but I am more ashamed of my coun- 
trymen, who hear and laud it. 

There are, likewise, in this book evidences of 
malignity toward the sacred writers and the ortho- 
dox faith, which I am sorry to see, and which give 
a darker hue to its spirit than that given by con- 
ceited or erratic intellect. On page 275 Mr. Par- 
ker speaks of the Evangelists as dull evangelists^'^'' 
who may have thrust their own fancies into the 
mouth of Jesus ; and on page 277 he says Christ \ 
did not call Peter a false liar, as he was^ /} 



22 PARKER'S THEOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY. 

Now that a man can write in this way concern^ 
ing those whom Jesus called as his friends and 
disciples, and commissioned to be the founders of 
the Christian Church, and concerning one who 
willingly atoned for an error by penitence and 
martyrdom, is an indication of malignity so dis- 
tinct that it is painful. It may not seem so to Mr. 
Parker, but it will seem so to every one who is in 
sympathy with the spirit and principles of Christ 
and his apostles. It may be said that Christ spoke 
of Peter as a tempter, and admonished him of his 
errors. Bat the language of admonition and re- 
buke serves a purpose. The language of malignity, 
when no good end can be subserved by it, is a 
different thing. 

I have written these paragraphs to establish a 
principle. I have used Mr. Parker's name and his 
book, rather as the representatives of a class. If 
Mr. Parker would accept revelation as a guide to 
his reason, and the example and spirit of Christ as 
model and impulse in the achievement of all real 
good for humanity, he would be a wiser and a 
better man. The man who rejects these, and yet 
professes to teach of God and duty, is necessarily a 

BLIND LEADER of the BLIND. 



LETTER II. 



VARIATIONS AND INC 0 NQRUITIES. 

My Dear Sir : — 

'S.ow" is it that such men as you tolerate dog- 
matic assertion and crude philosophisms in such 
writers as Carljle, Emerson, and Parker, while on 
the same subject you require in others mature and 
accurate thought ? It is possible that in relation to 
some things the teachings of Christ may not be fully 
nor clearly apprehended, even by those who receive 
and obey his instruction ; thoughtfully to examine 
those teachings is therefore lawful and proper. If 
there be objections to the views of Christians, let 
them be distinctly and fairly stated, and upright 
minds will hear and weigh the reasons alleged by 
objectors. If men have a better system to propound, 
let them show it, and old errors will vanish in the 
light of a newly-developed truth. Let those who 
do not discriminate between good sense and pom- 
pous pretense stand agape in the presence of theo- ' 
logical bravado and assertion ; but wiU you, and the 



24 VAEIATIOlSrS AND IlSrCOlSrGIlUITIES. 

intelligent class of men to wliicli you belong, accept 
crude dicta from any man, on a subject of serious 
moment, and accept it, as I am sorry to believe, 
witli little or no examination. 

We do not design, in ttus writing, to disparage tbe 
conceded ability of tbe authors to whom we have 
alluded. In some respects they are learned and able 
men ; and Mr. Parker, especially, seems to me to be 
sincerely engaged in some of the reform efforts of 
our time. But any mind — even that of Laplace or 
Bishop Butler — were it afloat on the sea of skeptical 
conjecture^ without the pole-star by which reason 
might direct her course, would become perplexed, 
and would perplex others^ by its erratic wanderings 
on a starless sea. 

Notice, with me, whether there be any evidence 
of crude and contradictory thought in the teachings 
of the popular skeptic already named : — 

Mr. Parker afl&rms that Christianity is the ab- 
solute religion," and that Jesus taught absolute re- 
ligion to men. Now, this is obviously true, and 
when rightly considered, it is absolute evidence, not 
only of the divine origin, but of the divine nature 
of Christianity. Christianity teaches absolute obe- 
dience to God. It reveals infinite love in Christ. 
Love can reach an expression no higher than is given 



YARIATIOXS AXD I OXGR UITIE S. 25 

in the crucifixion. It is in Clirist stronger than deatli 
- — hence it is absolute. The Fatherhood of God — 
the brotherhood of men are taught in ultimate and_ 
absolute terms. Filial obedience becomes absolute 
when we love God with all our heart ; and righteous- 
ness is absolute when we love our neighbor as ourself. 
There can be nothing different — nothing better — 
nothing further in morals and pietv than the example 
and teachings of Christ : hence Christianity, as ex- 
pressed by the life and teachings of Jesus, is absolute 
and ultimate rehgion. 

We may afl&rm that Christianity is absolute in 
another sense. It is perfectly and alone adapted to 
promote the highest good of men. If received and 
obeyed in the spirit of its Author, it combines as 
much of happiness and active usefulness in the life 
of its recipient as his constitution will permit. 

Let it be allowed, then, in the accepted sense, that 
Jesus taught the absolute religion. In this the true 
Christian rejoices. This Mr. Parker affirms ; but 
yet, as we shall see, he makes his own statement 
both nugatory and ridiculous. 

Mr. Parker says, in the beginning of his book, 
p. 18, that the religious sentiment does not itself dis- 
close the character^ and still less the nature and es- 
sence, of the object on which it depends.'' 

2 



26 VARIATIONS AND INCONGRUITIES. 

Again, p. 27 — ^^The sentiment of God, thougli 
vague and mysterious, is always tlie same in it- 
self." 

Further, on p. 226, we are told that Christian- 
ity can be no greater than the religious sentiment, 
though it may be less." 

The absolute religion of Mr. Parker, then, is no 
greater than a vague sentiment, that does not itself 
disclose the character of God — and it may be less." 
Yerily, Mr. P.'s disciples are in the way of getting 
a queer idea of " the absolute religion" taught by 
Jesus. 

But furthermore, there is not only one, but there 
are several judges to aid in deciding that Chris- 
tianity is the absolute religion." On p. 22, we are 
informed that Christianity is to be judged of by 
the religious sentiment — ^by other forms of religion, 
and by reason." Strange enough, this — ^a religion 
to be judged by a vague sentiment that does not 
give the character of God ! Christianity does give 
the character of God. How shall it be judged by a 
sentiment that does not ? How shall facts be judged 
by a sentiment ! But Mr. P.'s absolute religion is 
not only to be judged by reason, which is well 
enough (if he means enlightened reason), but it is to 
be judged by other religions. We supposed the 



VABIATIOXS AXD I^T C OXGR U IT I E S. 27 

absolute \vas the judge of all else ; but Mr. P. makes 
all else judge the absolute. 

TVe are told, on p. 269, of a peculiarity of the ab- 
solute religion wbicb Mr. P. teaches, and tells his 
readers Jesus of Nazareth taught. He says : 

It is not a system of theological or moral doc- 
trines, but a method of religion and life. It lays 
down no positive creed to he helieved in — commands no 
positive action to he done. It would make man per- 
fectly obedient to God, leaving his thoughts and 
actions for reason and conscience to govern." 

We have, then, an absolute Christianity which is 
a method without theological or moral doctrines. 
What does Mr. P. intend to do with his theological 
doctrine of the reli2:ious sentiment ? He tells us, 
too, at the close of his book, that he wants real 
Christianity — the absolute religion — preached with 
faith, and applied to life." Faith in what? A doc- 
trine is a rule of faith and practice ; but if Chris- 
tianity has neither theological or moral doctrine" in 
it, and requires neither faith nor practice, how can 
it be preached with faith? — ^how applied to life? 
Does not Mr. P. mean a transcendental rather than 
an absolute religion. We think this must be so, as 
the same author teaches in another volume (Ten 



28 VAEIATIONS AND INCONGRUITIES. 



Sermons, p. 12), tliat a man may be religious and 
not know it. 

Mr. P. tells us that his absolute religion is a 
" method of life according to conscience and reason." 
But a man's conscienca is as his faith ; and we are 
told that the absolute religion of Mr. Parker pre- 
scribes no creed to be believed. The method, then, 
must be very various ; and it can not be a method 
of any particular value, for our philosopher tells us, 
in another place (p. 104), that many a savage — his 
hands smeared all over with human sacrifices— shall 
come from the east and the west, and sit down in 
the kingdom of Grod, with Moses and Zoroaster, 
with Socrates and Jesus." The worst method in 
the worlds then, will answer the same end as Mr. 
Parker's Christian method. And then Mr. Parker 
tells us, that method is all there is of Christianity ! 
O transcendentalism ! 

Mr. Parker's absolute Christianity," then, is a 
religion no greater, but which may be less^ than a 
vague religious sentiment. It offers nothing to be 
believed. It commands nothing to be done. It is 
a method of life ; but any other method — even a 
human sacrifice — will answ^er the same end ! 

There are other definitions of absolute Christi- 
anity," some of which are better than the foregoing. 



YAEIATIOXS ASD I^^C OX GE UITIES. 29 



It would be Throng to pass them i;vithont notice. In 
one place we are told, religion is perfect obedience 
to the law of God, revealed in z/utinct, reason^ con- 
science^ and the religious sentimentJ'' The Mormons 
have this phase of the absolute, putting instinct first, 
as Mr. Parker does. 

There is another definition on page 226, which 
approaches the circle of sense, and if the author 
w^ould admit that ''faith which works by love," his 
definition on this page might be accepted. He says^ 
Absolute religion is perfect obedience to the law 
of God" — ''perfect love toward God and man ex- 
hibited in a life allowing and demanding a harmo- 
nious action of all man's faculties so far as thej act 
at all." 

This, although a little blind as to its import, is a 
very different thing from the absolute religion on 
another page, which proposes nothing to be be- 
lieved, and requires nothing to be done. 

Then, on page 271, we have something just the 
opposite of what is said before. We are told that 
" Christianity differs from other religions in its 
QmuiQuilj practical character,''^ Agreed, Mr. Parker ! 
Eminently practical, certainly, if we take the life 
and teachings of the Christ as its exponent. Let us 
forget the falsehood and folly of " nothing to be be- 



30 VARIATIONS AND INCONaRUITIES. 



lieved and nothing commanded," and listen to tlie 
voice of the Master calling ns to faith and duty — 
" Go ye, therefore; teach all nations, baptizing them 
in the name of the FATHEE, and of the SON, and 
of the HOLY GHOST— teaching them to observe 
all things whatsoever I have COMMANDED yoiCj and 
lo ! I am with you always, even to the end of the 
world. Amen." 

There, my dear sir ! How different the intent, the 
thought, and the spirit of this commission from the 
theological vagaries over which we have passed ! 
The doctrine of the Trinity — one name, yet three 
persons ; men to be baptized into that three persons 
in one name; taught to ^'observe all things that 
Christ had commanded," with the blessed promise 
annexed of the spiritual presence of Jesus : Lo ! I 
am with you always unto the end of the woild.^' 

What is this ? Christ a man like his disciples, 
and yet to be with them, everywhere and always, 
unto the end of the world I 

Pausing and thoughtful — your friend as ever. 



LETTER III. 



MISSTATEMENTS. 

My Dear Sir: — 

Men who are sincere and interested inquirers 
in relation to religious triitli, will not commit them- 
selves to a guide who, by any subterfuge, exhibits 
part of the truth as the whole — certainly not to one 
who makes exaggerated and erroneous statements 
in relation to the facts in the case. Honest men 
sometimes misrepresent the opinions of others be- 
cause they are not fully inforned upon the subject 
of discussion ; but erroneous statements are inex- 
cusable when they are made by those who seek to 
gain an end by perverting, or keeping out of sight, 
a correct view of the subject which they are 
opposing. This bad men, who are political or re- 
ligious partisans, will do ; but this a man who hon- 
estly seeks to discover and establish truth will 
not do. 

In the volume before us there is evidence of 



32 



MISSTATEMENTS. 



subterfuge and erroneous affirmation. Let us put 
the best construction upon the motive, while we 
notice some palpable instances. 

In speaMng of inspiration in the general sense— 
or of the influence of God in nature," to use the 
language of the author (p. 212) — the lovely, the 
interesting — whatever leaves upon the sense a 
pleasant impression, or stirs the mind with elevat- 
ing thought, is grouped mto a picture to convey an 
idea of God, as he exhibits himself to the senses ; 
and then we are told, ^' Nature is religion." But 
the night side of nature" is omitted. It is indeed 
pleasant to ignore foul odors, poison, torture, ma- 
lignant passion, and the horrid and the driveling 
in natural objects ; but for one possessing Mr. Par- 
ker's opinions — one who involves the divine in the 
material — for such an one to speak of God in natu- 
ral good, while he omits to notice in the same con- 
nection natural evil, is simply to beguile such of his 
hearers as choose to be thus beguiled; and such 
likewise as are unable to discriminate between 
rhetoric and reason. 

In Discourses of Eeligion," p. 239, Mr. Parker 
states that Jesus considered himself as sent of God, 
but he adds, ^'Yet he never speaks of his con- 
nection, with God as pecaliar ; never calls himself 



:misstatem:exts. 



33 



the Son of God in any sense wherein all good men 
are not also sons of God.'' 

iST ow, this statement is an absolute misrepresenta- 
tion of the teaching of Christ. Can it be that Mr. 
Parker Trould take advantage of the ignorance of 
many of his readers in relation to the claims of the 
Redeemer? Shall we not rather suppose that the 
writers zeal to gain a point had exckided, for the 
time being, from his mind all counter statements ? 

Jesus says, Matt. xi. 27, and also in Luke, All 
things are delivered to rue of my Father ; o.ad no man 
hnoweth who the Son is^ hut the Father^ and icho the 
Father is, hut the Son, and he to whom the Son will 
reveal hirnP 

Here the Christ not only speaks of himself as 
sovereign of all things, but he afl&rms that no one 
knows who or what he is, but the Father ; and 
further, that no man knows the Father but the 
Son, and he to ichonisoever the Son v:ill revead 
him. 

Notice, Christ, as the Son, is the revealer of the 

Father. And without the revelation which Christ 

makes, no man knows who God the Father is. 

And notice, especially, that he declares his own 

nature to he still more unknown to men than that of 

the Father. The Father only knows the Son, but 

2* 



34 



MISSTATEMENTS. 



it is not said tlie Father reveals tlie Son. The 
Son onlj kno^YS the Father, but it is said the Son 
reveals the Father. The union of God with hu- 
manity in Christ is a mystery, as it respects the 
nature of that union. 

Instead, therefore, of its being true that Christ 
never speaks of himself as holding a peculiar con- 
nection with the Father, differing from that of 
other good men^ he afSrms the awakening truths 
that the Father alone knows the Son, and that the 
Son alone knows the Father ; and that he is the 
only revealer of the Father to men. 

Now, my dear sir, what shall we think of our 
countrymen who assail the divine in Christianity 
under the guidance of a champion who makes such 
palpable misstatements in regard to one of the most 
vital points involved in the subject of inquiry ? 

To the foregoing might be added many passages 
from the book of John, which I am just informed 
this author has recently concluded does not belong 
to the Apostolic age. Matthew and Luke, how- 
ever, are yet, I presume, considered evangelists, 
although Mr. Parker speaks of them as being 
''dull/' and often mistaken. 

There are flippant and false charges against the 
orthodox religion in this volume. In the Intro- 



MISSTATEMENTS. 



35 



duction it is written, The popular religion is hos- 
tile to man ; tells us lie is an outcast ; not a child 
of God ; but a spurious issue of the devil." Now 
it was Jesus who said, Ye are of your father the 
devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do" 
(John, viii. 44). In the sense in which Jesus ut- 
tered these words the statement is true, and the 
popular religion never makes the statement in any 
other sense. 

The tenor of the gospel, as taught by all evan- 
gelical preachers, is just the opj)osite of what Mr. 
Parker would convey by these words. While it 
teaches that all men are the servants of sin, and not 
characteristically children of God, yet this is made 
the very basis of mercy. God, in the person of his 
Son, speaks to the offenders — offers pardon — en- 
lightens the mind by truth — does not impute sin 
where there is no light — and with the light there is 
revealed a love that is stronger than death, in or- 
der to subdue the heart to the rule of duty. And 
then eternal life is promised to all who, being en- 
lightened^ will repent from sin, and love God in 
Christy and thus be induced to labor for the good 
of men." (See ^' God Eevealed in Creation and in 
Christ," p. 299, etc.) This is the tea. Jng of the 
gospel, according to the popular religioir, and yet 



86 



MISSTATEMENTS. 



our anthor tells his readers tliat this religion is hos- 
tile to man ! They manifest hostility to man who 
labor to turn away his mind from this religion. 
"We hope such may be forgiven. They know not 
what they do." 

It would be utterly impracticable to go through 
the book and mark all the passages which offend 
against truth and fairness, in a manner similar to 
those noted above. Mr. Parker is adroit in weav- 
ing into the same passage — often into the same 
paragraph — a mixture of truth and error. Some- 
times one predominates, and sometimes the other. 
In relation to the life and death of Christ, he writes 
plainly. After afl&rming that the party he repre- 
sents calls God Father, not King," and Eeligion 
nature," with various other expressions equally 
, right and wrong, hes ays — Jesus lived for himself^ 
died for himself worked out Ms own salvation^ and 
we must do the same, for one man can not live for 
another any more than he can eat or sleep for him." 
. This sort of guileful sophistry, to give it no 
worse name, is prevalent throughout the book. 
" One man can not live for another any more than 
he can eat or sleep for him !" Suppose I should 
say, one man can not succor or instruct another 
any more than he can breathe for him I Can not 



MISSTATEilEXTS. 



37 



men of sense see the fallacy of siicli statements ? 
To eat and sleep are the habitudes of the animal 
nature, necessary to the existence of animal life. 
But do not parents, in a moral sense, often live for 
their children ? — work for them — suffer for them — 
nay, even die for them ? One man can not eat 
for another, but one man can procure food to sus- 
tain life in others who have no means of procuring 
it for themselves. This Mr. Parker knows is the 
sense of the New Testament. And shall one 
earthly friend suffer and even die for another, 
while our Divine Friend and Father will not mani- 
fest so much love for his earthly children ? 

It is said that a Scotchman, whose wife^ for some 
offense against the laws, was sentenced to undergo 
certain penal labors — labors more than he supposed 
her little strength could endure — obtained the re- 
lease of his wife by discharging the penalty which 
was to be inflicted on her. Did he not live for 
her — bear her burden ? And would not his wife 
abhor the offense ever afterward which brought the 
evil on her husband ? — a husband now rendered 
surpassingly dear to her by the manifestation of his 
love ; and would she not avoid a repetition of the 
offense, and love him with the love of devotion and 
gratitude to the end of her days ? 



38 



MISSTATEMENTS. 



As human nature is constitued by its Maker, 
this would be the effect upon the human heart 
of such acts of self-denial for the benefit of the 
guilty. And the very nature of love, of goodness, 
of mercy, is to impart of our means, our efforts^ 
and even of our blood, if need be, for the good of 
our fellow-men. Love is absolute. It is one. It 
must be the same in kind in Grod as in man. It is 
one in all moral beings. Holy minds find their 
life and happiness in the labor and self-denial which 
love prompts for the good of others. Is not God 
benevolent ? If he is, then love begets love ; and 
hence an exhibition of self-denying love for men 
would aid and bless all who would believe. Mani- 
fested love reconciles enemies. Would not God 
manifest his love to the disobedient? Would he 
himself act according to laws which himself has 
constituted? If Christ's sacrifice was not an ex- 
hibition of divine love, then God is not so benevo- 
lent as he requires man to be. Has heaven mani- 
fested no benevolence to earth ? Not if Mr. 
Parker's statement be true. If " Christ lived for 
himself and died for himself'' there is benevolence 
on earth, but not in heaven. 

Christ died for Himself," says Mr. Parker. 
Did he? Then he did what he did not intend 



MISSTATE ME^^TS. 



89 



to do. He says, in Matthew, xx. 28, The son of 
man came not to be ministered imto, but to minis- 
ter ; and to give his life a ransom for mo.nyj'' So 
believers and confessors have ever understood and 
felt in relation to Christ's death. He gave 
himself a ransom for all to be testified [made 
known to all] in due time." ^' He worked out his 
own salvation," says Mr. Parker. Did he ? Then 
he did what he did not mean to do. He afl&rms 
that "for your sakes I sanctify myself, that you 
may be sanctified through me." He said he 
should " be lifted up, that whosoever belie veth on 
him might not perish, but have everlasting life." 
" The good shepherd giveih his life for the sheep^ 

Here, m}' dear sir, I leave this portion of the 
book which you commended to my notice. Its 
teachings I pronounce to be untrue to Scripture, 
and often false to reason. Its style is sinister and 
pretentious. Its teachings are as unlike the Chris- 
tianity of the New Testament as your beau- 
tiful garden is unlike the tangled morass where 
grow some wild-flowers, but flowers enveloped in 
impure vapor. The flowers are those aspects of re- 
form and humanity for which we respect the au- 
thor—the vapors are the prevalence of wrong and 
hurtful thought, which we deplore. 



40 



MISSTATEMENTS. 



At some time not far in the future I stall notice 
some otlier things in this work^ and endeavor to 
give you my views of the reasonableness of some 
of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity — es- 
pecially of those doctrines which are rejected by 
the prevailing skepticism of our times. 

Yours truly. 



LETTER IV. 



DIYINE PERSONALITY. 

Mr Deae Sir : — 

The skepticism of our times, like its talented 
preachers, is popular in many circles of well-informed 
people. I call it skepticism^ because, while it assails 
the generally -received faith of evangelical Christians, 
it offers no comprehensible system instead of the 
faith it labors to destroy. It begets donbt, bnt it 
produces no conviction that is influential upon the 
heart and will of men. It is, therefore, skepticism ; 
and if the Christian religion, in its evangehcal 
interpretation, be of any value, it is hurtful skep- 
ticism. 

It is popular in some instances, because it assumes 
the attitude of reform, and therefore commends it- 
self to minds of humane and progressive tendencies. 
It is popular in a wider sense with many who desire 
to retain the name of Christian while they refuse 
obedience to Christ. In the name of Jesus it denies 
the divine authority of Christianity ; whether a man 



42 



DIYINE PEESONALITY. 



receive or reject the^ gospel, he is a Christian: lie 
that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth 
not shall be saved. Such a system has the elements 
of popnlaritj with all sorts of men, except those 
who maintain the Scripture doctrine, that repentance 
and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ are conditions of 
holiness and eternal life. 

But does this modern phase of skepticism com- 
mend itself to the reason of fair-minded men? 
Should the doubts which it encourages concerning 
the foundational truths of revealed religion be en- 
tertained ? Let us put into the balance of reason 
some of its utterances, and weigh them against the 
doctrines of the Christian faith. 

You will, doubtless, have noticed, that while the 
writers of the Carlyle school, such as Emerson 
and Parker, adopt language which speaks of God as 
a personal being, they likewise write many passages 
which make the impression that there is no per- 
sonal God ; or none that can be called personal in 
any comprehensible sense. On this, as on other 
subjects of the most grave interest, one may find on 
one page of Mr. Parker's book a distinct recognition 
of truth, while in another place the same truth is 
perplexed by doubt, nullified by contradictory ex- 
pressions, or rendered incomprehensible by words 



DIVINE PERSONALITY. 



43 



as innocent of any particular import as moonsHne 
is of caloric. 

We have noticed, in a preceding letter, tlie pecu- 
liar pbilosopby in relation to the ^' idea," ^ senti- 
ment," and ^'conception'' of God. Now, if any of 
Mr. P.'s disciples suppose that by this teaching they 
know any thing about God as a personal being, 
there are several passages that will correct that mis- 
take at once. It had been said that all men have 
an idea of God ; but, according to other passages, 
if any one believes that he knows any thing about 
God, either as a 'personal or a conscious divine being 
— or that he has any comprehensible ^4dea" what- 
ever on this subject, it is all a mistake. Notice this 
in the following passage : 

We talk of a personal God. If thereby we only 
deny that he has the limitations of unconscious mat- 
ter, no harm is done. But our conception of per- 
sonality is that of finite personality^ limited by 
human imperfections — hemmed in by time and 
spacC' — restricted by partial emotions — displeasure 
— wrath — ^ignorance — caprice. Can this be said of 
God ? If matter were conscious, as Locke thinks (?) 
it possible, it must predicate materiality of God, as 
persons predicate personality. If it mean God has 
not the hmitations of our personality, it is well. But 



44 



DIVINE PEKSOKALITY. 



if it mean that he has those of unconscious matter, 
it is worse than the other term. Can God he per- 
sonal and conscious as Joseph and Peter — unconscious 
and impersonal as a moss or the celestial ether ? No 
man will say it. Where, then, is the philosophic 
value of such terms?" — p. 151. 

Now, we afl&rm that this is not only directly con- 
tradictory to what was said before, but that there is 
neither philosophy nor sense in it. 

Mr. Parker, as we have seen, analyzes the con- 
ception which he says men form of God, and finds 
in it power, wisdom, and love,'^ without limitation. 
Now, if the idea of personality in God must be lim- 
ited by human imperfection, why not wisdom and 
love thus limited ? There is contradiction in affirm- 
ing the one and denying the other. So that, if Mr. 
P. affirms that God is not personal in any compre- 
hensible sense, then he must affirm, according to his 
own showingi that God is neither wise nor unwise, 
good nor evil, in any comprehensible sense. To 
affirm personality of God as an infinite being is, as 
we shall see, more rational than to affirm wisdom or 
love of him, because the human idea of moral char- 
acter^ without revelation, is imperfect ; but the idea 
of personal identity is absolute, and always the same 
in all beings. ^ 



DIVIXE PEESONALITY. 



45 



There are some things wliicli are the same in 
themselves, and the same forever. Truth must be 
the same to all intelligent beings, so far as known 
to them. Two and three are five with Grod as thej 
are with Joseph and Peter. Self-consciousness can 
not be one thing in Grod and another thing in man. 
The absolute truths of the universe, when known, 
must be the same to all beings that have a moral 
nature, or else the moral universe is founded on the 
principle of discord. Personality is an absolute 
truth — it is an intuition. We conceive of it in Grod 
as distiDctly as we perceive it in ourselves. 

Mr. Parker's reasons, annexed to the above par- 
agraph, are about equal to the reasons annexed to 
his statements on some other subjects. So far as 
there is any reason in the matter, the author's idea 
is, that because God can not be affirmed to be im- 
personal and unconscious as the moss and the ce- 
lestial ether, therefore he is not personal nor con- 
scious. If the argument were good for any thing — 
judging of the cause from the effect — then, as two 
opposite characteristics are instanced in the objects 
named, instead of proving that Grod is neither con- 
scious nor unconscious, personal nor impersonal, it 
would prove that he is both the one and the other. 
The foregoing passage is written in the phrase of 



46 



DIVINE PEKSONALITY. 



blank pantheism; and yet Mr, Parker, in otTier 
places, denies the doctrine. 

Furthermore, it is admitted by the writer that 
man is a personal and conscious being, and that 
matter is not personal or conscious. It is conceded 
that personal agents and impersonal objects do exist. 
To deny this would be to deny the validity of both 
sense and reason. Now, if it be a fact that personal 
and conscious agents do exist, separate from imper- 
sonal and unconscious objects, why may not God 
exist as a proper personal and conscious being, sep- 
arate from and ruling over the kingdoms of nature? 
Is man a personal . and conscious being, while God 
has a mixed identity— conscious and unconscious at 
the same time ! To argue that because one man is 
white and another is black, therefore George Wash- 
ington could be neither a white man nor a black 
man, would be a conclusion as rational as that of 
Mr. P. when he utters the nonsense, that because 
personal agents and impersonal objects both exist, 
therefore God is neither, or that he is both. 

To doubt of the personality of God and his 
conscious separateness from matter, is to plunge 
the human reason back into the blindness of an 
atheistic philosophy. The wisdom of the ancients, 
of which Plato is the highest exponent, after ages 



DIYIKE PERSONALITY. 



47 



of discussion, readied tlie conclusion that plan was 
before organization — a designer before a construc- 
tion. And if there be such a thing as an intuition 
(which we ought to admit, notwithstanding the 
word is sadly abused by the transcendentalists when 
they utter their opinions in its name), this is one — 
the designer is before and apart from the design. 
Man is conscious of designing and then of moulding 
the unconscious matter into the forms of the mentaj 
archetype. We are so made, that it is not possi- 
ble for any one to perceive clearly the marks of 
design in any object without the accompanying 
conyiction that plan was before the construction. 
Whether we call this conviction, intuition, expe- 
rience, or a logical deduction, the result is still the 
same : common reason teaches every man, what 
philosophy sanctions as the result of her most pro- 
found inquiries, that a designing cause is before 
and apart from a designed effect. Eeason afl&rms 
design in nature. To write skeptically, therefore, 
concerning the conscious personality of Grod, as Mr. 
Parker has done, is a sin against reason and phi- 
losophy, as well as against common sense and re- 
ligion. 

But there are scientific facts, ascertained beyond 
question, which should dispel the vague notions of 



48 



DIVINE PEESONALITY. 



those who speak of Grod as the materiality of mat- 
ter," and as being inseparable from nature." An 
extract from God Eevealed in the Process of 
Creation, and by the Manifestation of Christ," will, 
I think, show that the idea of a God who is nei- 
ther conscious nor unconscious, in the common ac- 
ceptation of language, is no more in consonance 
'with the facts of science than it is with the deduc- 
tions of right reason. 

The "Natural Development" theory — which ar- 
gues that nature has been advanced from lower to 
higher species, by some law or power which is in- 
separable from the material universe, and which 
has developed itself from inanimate matter up 
through an ascending series from the lowest to the 
highest genera of things — issues itself in an utter 
absurdity. " God is inseparable from nature/' says 
the author of the Vestiges." To this agree 
Compte and probably such philosophers as Nott, 
Gliddon, and multitudes of others, like Mr. Parker, 
who know little or nothing of the scientific basis of 
the argument. 

Let us notice some legitimate results of this 
theory. The whole subject is discussed at length 
in the volume referred to. The following is a pas- 
sage from chapter viii. : 



DIVIXE PEESOXALITY. 



49 



" TThen it is said, ^ G-ocI can not be separated 
from nature,' while at the same time he is affirmed 
to be the ^ author and sustainer of nature,' the im- 
port can not be, according to this theory, that God 
has exercised any personal act of creation or con- 
trol, since gravitation first affected the material 
which formed our system ; or, if the theory be con- 
fined to the earth, then no creative act has been put 
forth by the Maker since the first organic cell was 
formed, and that was not formed by a divine au- 
thor, but by law. God is declared to be ' nature.' 
It is said he is inseparable from nature, and that 
nature is the manifestation of God. Hence, as a 
logical necessity, natural phenomena, organic and 
inorganic, manifest all the God that belons-s to this 
theory. 

If, then, God be inseparable from material na- 
ture now, he has been inseparable from nature in 
all periods of past progress. Then what follows ? 
Why this : Reason is a product of material devel- 
opment; hence, before the existence of organic 
forms, there was no reason in existence, none, at 
least, in any wise connected with our planet. In- 
telligence w^as developed from lower susceptibilities 
up to higher instincts, and thence still up to the 

human mind. Then, as a sequent of this doctrine, 

3 



50 



DIVINE PERSONALITY. 



at early periods of creative progress bj law, intelli- 
gence did not exist ; and if God can not be sepa- 
rated from nature, then before nature produced in- 
telligence, there, was no intelligent God. During 
tlie Saurian Age, the lizard mind was the highest 
in existence ; and if there be nothing above and 
separate from nature, tnen the fish-lizard-god was, 
for the time, the supreme being ; or at least the su- 
premest being that acted in connection with the 
earth. 

But, is it said that not only the laws and beings 
of our earth, but the laws and beings of our whole 
system, or of the universe, are included in the idea 
of * progressive development,' and that, with this 
enlarged conception, God can not be separated from 
nature ? Now^ admitting the idea to be expanded, 
then, if God can not be separated from natu.re. He 
is in different stages of development in the universe at 
the same time. He is in different stages of develop- 
ment at the same time in our solar system ; thus, 
in either view, the idea is an absurdity. 

The legitimate ultimatum of any theory that 
recognizes the law of progressive development in 
creation as a power developing new and higher 
species out of lower ones ; and which affirms at the 
same time that ' God is nature' and ^ inseparable 



I 



DITIXE PERSONALITY. 



51 



from nature' — tliiis placing divine interposition out 
of the question — tlie nltimatuni of such a theory 
is, that as law has produced new species progress- 
ively from the mollusk to the man, so the future 
will be as the past ; the latter joroduct rising above 
previous ones, until the laws of nature will create a 
God^ instead of God creating nature, 

What a rest to the soul is the rational, philo- 
sophical, and scriptural view, compared with such 
atheistic monstrosities : — matter and its jDroperties 
in the beginning ; force developed and laws insti- 
tuted by the dispositions of matter ; organic life 
and progress from lower to higher forms ; that 
progress effected by the instrunientality of natural 
forces and laws ; advance by the destruction of 
lower and the introduction of higher species ; — the 
whole produced^ advanced^ and controlled in accord- 
ance with Si plan which bears the impress of a Su- 
preme Creator and Governor." 

There are moral considerations connecting them- 
selves with this subject which add to the difficulties 
of skepticism, while they accumulate proofs of the 
personal existence of the Divine Being. 

Reason can account for things as they are, only 
upon one of three theories. 

1. Chance, or the undetermined succession of 



52 



DIVINE PEESOKALIT Y. 



events, in V7liicli notliing is settled, but every thing 
happens fortuitous!}^ and without design. 

2. An omnipotent fate or law, sometimes called 
necessity, or the necessitj^ of things, which causes 
and determines each event to exist invariably as it 
does ; and which must thus cause all events in mat- 
ter and mind forever. 

3. A supreme intelligent Creator and Lawgiver, 
who governs the universe by laws adapted to the 
nature of things. 

The first of these theories needs no discussion. 

The second theory has been proposed by skepti- 
cal inquirers ever since the birth of philosophy. It 
is still held' in some form by atheists, by material- 
ists, by those who believe in a law-soul of the 
world ; and more recently by some who seem to 
believe that the machine of the universe being 
started, its own impulse produces all phenomena 
and all results which are exhibited in the worlds 
of matter and of mind. 

Supposing this theory to be true, what do we 
learn concerning the moral character of God, and 
the condition and prospects of man ? 

If there be no personal God, then Theodore Par- 
ker is a personal creature without a personal crea- 
tor — a child without a father, and an effect without 



DIYIXE PERSONAL ITT. 



58 



a cause. But leaving laconics ^Mcli need explana- 
tion, it will not be denied that man is a mortal and 
dependent being. He did not cause his own exist- 
ence, and he is liable at any moment to suffer det- 
riment in mind and body by laws or circum- 
stances (call them what you will) over which he 
has no control. If there be no personal God who 
administers a moral government which differs from 
the allotments of nature, then man is plainly the 
victim of a power that is malignant in its nature. 
Call that power what you will — the substantiality 
of matter," as Parker would say ; or the impersonal 
nature of things, as Mirabaud and Compte would 
assert. A personal God separate from nature being 
ignored, then the nature of things is a power — man 
is subject to that power, and that power isevilj^e/' 
se, and evil in development. If this blind j)ower 
be called God, it can be described by adding a 
single adjective to the definition of Mr. Parker — a 
^' God — neither personal nor impersonal, conscious 
nor unconscious*' — but malignant. 

In order to see the ground of this affirmation, 
notice in connection with it the phenomena of con- 
science. 

If all things occur by a force of nature, or by 
any impersonal force operating through nature, a 



54 



DIVIl^E PEESOKALITY. 



man should suffer no more for an evil act than a 
good one. If a parent were to force, or even influ- 
ence his child to do a certain action, and then pun- 
ish him for doing it, such a father would be a mon- 
ster. It has been replied to this, that a man suffers 
compunction of conscience because he believes an 
act to be wrong, and thus believing, it is righteous- 
ness^ in the nature of things, which causes him to 
suffer for it. But evidently this reply only re- 
moves the difficulty one step further back. Ac- 
cording to this system, a man's faith, good or bad, 
is produced as much by a force of nature and cir- 
cumstance as his actions ; hence, the compimction 
of conscience is still the result of a necessitated an- 
tecedent. Nature, therefore, which attaches re- 
morse to an act which she herself produces^ either 
immediately or by a chain of causes, is just as ma- 
lignant as a parent would be if he influenced his 
son to do a wrong action and then punished him 
for doing it. If man be a voluntary moral agent, 
and sin a moral evil, the office of conscience in ad- 
monishing of sin and denouncing the sinner, is an 
evidence of the mercy and justice of God. But if 
man be not a personal agent — if God be not a per- 
sonal sovereign — the conscience is a mystery and a 
malignity. 



t 



DIYIXE PEKSOISTALIT Y. 55 

It is, moreover, a law of man's moral nature that 
the more he lores evil, and the more frequently he 
sins, the less he sufters from the inflictions of con- 
science. If, then, there be beyond this laic of na- 
tiire no God who is the moral gwernor and judge 
of men, then nature is evidently malignant; be-* 
cause many men grow more selfish and wicked till 
they die, and the more evil they become, the less 
remorse they feel for sin. Xature thus makes sin 
the way of life. Despots succeed in crushing out 
light and liberty by banishing the master-spirits 
of the age, and shedding rivers of human blood — 
as those heartless adventurers the Bonapartes (and, 
I had almost written, some of their biographers). 
And yet, thousands of widows and orphans suffer 
thousands of times more in consequence of their 
evil acts than they do themselves. TTho dare say 
that if this be the work of nature, beyond which 
there is no God, that nature is not malignant ? In 
charity we accept some of Mr. Parker's best defi- 
nitions as his prevailing idea of God : but when he 
becomes a materiahst with iMirabaud, or a pantheist 
or law-soulist with Chambers and Compte, then, 
instead of writing down his impersonal God as 
knowledge, love, power, he should write j^ozf^r, laiv^ 
malignity. 



56 



DIYIIS-E PERSONALITY. 



But furthermore, and finally, and conclusively, 
unless the Maker has incorporated a falsehood into 
the human soul, man is a free^ responsible agent, 
and God is a personal moral governor. Man is so 
constituted, that he can not feel guilty for wrong 
unless he is conscious that he was voluntary in the 
wrong act. If, therefore, he is not the responsible 
cause of his own moral action, God has placed a 
Ijing witness in his soul. 

But look again at the irrefragible testimony 
which the human consciousness gives of the re- 
sponsibility of man and the personality of God. 
Man is actually so constituted, as a moral being, 
that obedience and gratitude can be exercised only 
toward a personal being — a being v,^ho consciously 
and voluntarily does us good. Can man be grate- 
ful to the bread that satisfies his hunger? Can he 
obey, as a responsible being, something that is nei- 
ther personal nor impersonal in any comprehensible 
sense ? The thought is preposterous ! Unless the 
mor£il nature of man be a lie, produced by malig- 
nitj^, there is a personal conscious God, in the 
proper and only import of those terms^ to obey and 
love whom is the life and adaptation of the human 
soul. 

Is it not ridiculous, as well as preposterous, to 



DIYIXE PERSO^^ALITY. 57 

think of Mr. Parker expatiating upon the nature 
of God with the exhortation to love and obedience 
which must follow. He tells his hearers — " God is 
the ground of nature" — *' he is what permanent in 
the passing — what is real in the apparent." God 
is the materialit}^ of matter," so ''he is the spirit- 
uality of spirit." But "he is neither personal nor 
conscious, like Peter and Joseph, nor impersonal 
and unconscious, like the moss or the ether." The 
gTcatest religious souls can say with an old heathen, 
^ Since God can not be fully declared by any one 
name, though compounded of never so many, 
therefore he is rather to be called by every name, 
he being both one and all things.' " Mr. Parker 
then adds an exhortation, thus : '' As I have always 
told you, my friends, love and obedience to God 
is the duty and happiness of man. You have 
heard my description of ' the dear God.' I enjoin 
upon you to love and obey The Materiality of 
Matter, the All Things, the Spirituality of Spirit, 
the neither personal nor impersonal, conscious nor 
unconscious God. Yea, my hearers, I say unto 
you obey it ! It is immanent in all things — in 
the blush of the rose and in the bite of the dog — 
in the breath of the breeze and in the howl of the 

maniac. Eemember, too, our party ' calls religion 

3* 



58 



DIVINE PERSONALITY. 



nature' (p. 450) — believes ^ the divine incarnation 
is in all mankind' (p. 451) — Vasks no forgiveness 
for sin' (452) — therefore we will imitate the divine 
incarnation, and if we sin we will ask no forgive- 
ness. Amen and amen." 

NoW; if this be preposterous, it is so because it 
is an application of Parkerism in the light of com- 
mon sense. If any one says that passages are 
so clustered together as to make them seem pre- 
posterous, we deny the impeachment. Other re- 
sults may be obtained by inferences from other 
passages, but the above is a fair and an unavoid- 
able result from one class of passages written in this 
volume. 

And beside, there are single passages which are 
as preposterous in themselves as these are put to- 
gether, and not only in this volume, but they are 
found in nearly all of this author's writings. In 
one of his Ten Sermons (p. 176), for instance, he 
says of a fly, "Lo ! here I am an individual and 
conscious thing, sucking the bosom of the world." 
This is certainly hyperbole run mad; and ^ is just 
about as ridiculous as though I should say of Theo- 
dore Parker, Lo ! there he is, an individual and 
conscious philosophist, sucking transcendentalism 
from the great toe of the — man in the moon. 'J 



DIVINE P E E S 0 X A L I T Y. 



59 



Such nonsense produced by a man of ability, 
capable of writing sensibly and consistently, is only 
another evidence that without faith the mind is like 
a ship without ballast, driven by contrary winds. 
Turn away, my dear sir, from such hallucinations — 
hallucinations that mingle ,the evil and the incon- 
gruous with something of good ; and rejoice with 
me in the evidence, that above the laws of nature 
there presides a supreme joersonal God, the parent 
and the president of the universe. 

There are other evidences beside those to which 
we have alluded that af&rm this great truth — evi- 
dence in which all good and thoughtful men will 
rejoice together, although the doubts and difficul- 
ties interposed by skeptics were a thousand-fold 
greater than they are. 

God IS just — 

Because he has connected the monitions and re- 
proofs of conscience with acts known to be wrong. 

Because, if conscience be not heeded, it leaves 
the transgressor to grow hardened in evil ; evil 
which in itself is incipient penalty, and"which being 
voluntarily persisted in, becomes confirmed in the 
character of the transgressor. 

Because motives to good, if obeye^^ become 
more influential ; if disobeyed, less so. 



60 



DIVIISTE PERSONALITY. 



Becanse tlie moral constitution is so formed, that 
tlie more sinful men become, the more blind they 
become, both to the evil and the desert of sin. 

Because evil is not only linked with sin here, 
but while it brings present evil, it also forms an 
evil character in the soul, which secures future 
evil. 

God IS good — 

Because, to include much in one thought, he has 
made the soul so that its best good consists in a 
life of love to God and to men. And as love only 
can beget love, God becomes immanently personal 
in Christ, in whose sacrifice he reveals his love — 
and thus by faith the law of love is fulfilled in all 
who walk not after the flesh, or natural mind, but 
after the Spirit. 

Tell me now, my dear sir, is not such evidence; 
and the known practical results of the Christian 
faith, a satisfaction to the reason and a joy to the 
heart, while the brilliant vagaries of skeptical 
thinkers are empty and evil ? 

■ Yours, in behalf of right reason. 



LETTER V. 



the tri-uxitt of the diyine mind. 

My Dear Sir : — 

At the close of a former letter I proposed 
to offer, when leisure would allow, some reasons 
afl6.rmatory of the orthodox faith, with the design 
more especially to illustrate and defend some of the 
doctrines which are controverted or rejected by 
the skeptics of our times. 

In what I shall say I do not propose to give a 
Scriptural exposition of these doctrines, nor to pre- 
sent them in the form of a dogmatic statement ; nor 
do I propose to illustrate or confirm the symbols 
of any particular denomination. 

Illustrations are seldom perfectly accurate; and 
reasons which should be limited to certain aspects 
of a question, may be misapplied to cover the 
whole subject. My design, therefore, will not be 
to prove the systematic form of the doctrines of 
which I shall speak ; but to show that the evan- 
gelical interpretation of the Scriptures, as generally 



62 



TKI-UlSriTY OF THE DIVINE MIND. 



expressed in the formularies of the clinrches, has 
illustrative and analogical reasoning on its side. I 
desire to show that reason is with the evangelical 
system, and not against it ; and that many aspects 
of vital Christian doctrine, as expressed in the New 
Testament, may be sustained by accurate deduc- 
tion, and illustrated by the most profound analo- 
gies. 

The subject is presented in this form, not so 
much for the edification of Christians, as to con- 
vince gainsayers that reason, so far as she utters 
her voice, is with us, and against them. 

Let us look first at the doctrine of the Trinity. 
This doctrine is contained in the general expres- 
sion that there is one God, one name, Jehovah^ who 
is manifested in the Scriptures as subsisting in 
three divine persons, the Father, the Son, the Holy 
Ghost. 

It is agreed that the word person is used in dog- 
matic theology, not because its common import con- 
veys a perfect sense of the doctrine as revealed in 
the New Testament ; but because it convej^s a 
sense, which, being defined hy the phrases of the Scrip- 
tures, gives an accurate idea. It is, moreover, the 
most proper, we may say the only proper word^ be- 
cause the sacred writers all use the pronouns which 



tei-u:n'ity of the diyiis'e mind. 63 



the laws of language require should be used in a 
personal sense in substitution for Father, Son, and 
Spirit. No other word in any language will gen- 
eralize the expressions of the sacred writers. They 
apply the personal pronouns, as you know, to 
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, while yet they give 
to each of these the attributes of the one name — Je- 
HOYAH. It is easy for men to declaim ao;ainst the 
doctrine of the Trinity, but so long as they can not 
deny this usage of the inspired writers, there is a 
Scriptural basis for the orthodox interpretation. 

We affirm, then, that there is in the divine na- 
ture a basis for the tri-personal manifestation of 
God, and that it is only by the manifestation of 
God in three persons that the divine nature can be 
efficaciously known."^ 

* The Andover exposition of Schleiermacher, in the notes of Pro- 
fessor Stuart, affirms a basis in the divine mind for the triune mani- 
festation of God to men ; and affirms, hkewise, the adaptations of 
this divine manifestation to the wants of humanity. " Tri-unity, ac- 
cording to my humble apprehension, consists in something that 
belongs to the 'Movag itself, and which laid the foundations for the 
manifestations Father and Son and Spirity — " Who can refuse to 
acknowledge that either some modification or some property cf the 
divine nature, in respect to substance or attribute [general enough, 
certain!}^] led to the manifestation of the Godhead in what we call a 
personal manner 

Dr. Bushnell, of Hartford, who gives Schleiermacherism blinded 
by an imperfect conception, doubts this, as he does the proper hu- 
manity of Christ. In our humble opinion, Andover is right in its 



64 TEI-UJSriTY OF THE DIVi:tTE MIITD. 



It is well known that in the age of Plato, when, 
reason reached her culminathig point among the 
ancients, the idea of the tri-nnitj of God was 
strikingly approximated. Now^ while this fact 
does not prove that the depths of the divine can 
be fathomed by the finite human, we think it does 
prove that the most profound indications of the 
light of nature point in the direction of orthodox 
Christian doctrine.* 

The Philonic exposition is grounded in the phra- 

conception of the basis of that manifestation and of the person of 
the Redeemer, and Princeton is right in its announcement of the 
one will in three persons. 

It has been true in times past that the fear of the power which 
graceless dogmatics have exercised to create odium against reason, 
has prevented many who love the truth from conceding the value 
of the elder developments of the human reason on this and kindred 
subjects [that of Plato and Philo, for instance] ; but so long as it is 
true that the Alexandrine exposition of the Logos gives the usus lo- 
quendi of apostolic times — tlie man departs from the correct laws 
of interpretation who refuses to acknowledge the fact. 

* The seeds of the philosophy of Philo are found in the Old Testa- 
ment, while his system (if he really has one) is developed in Platonic 
phraseology. Philo in some passages undoubtedly attributes person- 
ality to the logos ; and it must be conceded that the Apostle John 
coincides in conception more nearly with Philo than he does with 
some symbolic expressions of later times — even of our times. 

We might speak, too, of some of the most profound thinkers 
among the Unitarians who have intimated in impressive circum- 
stances, and in imposing positions, a desire to be understood as ap- 
proximating the Trinitarian views of the Godhead. — See Channing 
and Bancrofts Addresses. ^ 



TRI-UNITY OF THE DIVIIs^E MIND. 65 



seology of the Old Testament — tlie Platonic in the 
constitution of the human mind. Both of these 
bear the impress of the Maker's mind, and. hence 
analogies derived from these sources are founded 
in truth. We do not af&rm that they are always 
rightly applied. 

The physical universe," you say, as well as 
the mora], bears upon its nature the impress of the 
creator." Certainly it does, and those who are dis- 
posed to pantheistic notions — who tell their hearers 
that nature is religion," and who find '^God im- 
manent in all things" — will, of course, favor analo- 
gies from the nature of material things to the na- 
ture of God. But when you say that a simple 
monad lies at the origin of all natural phenomena," 
the illustration is clearly at fault. If the atomic 
philosophy be true, there is an infinity of atoms, 
and likewise a diversity in their qualities. 

The elementary principles of matter may be sep- 
arated the one from the other, by chemical pro- 
/Cesses, and each of these, perhaps, has a molecular 
constitution ; but the actual economic entities of 
the physical world are mostly tri-unities". The ele- 
ments of the phenomenal world were not created 
to exist in separate unities, but to combine in the 
forms in which matter is manifested to man. The 



66 TRI-UNITY OF THE DIYINE MIND. 

elementary principles prove ly their affinities that they 
abhor ahsolute unity. Some two elements, with 
electricity, the every-where-present spirit of mat- 
ter, combine to form the character of material 
things, as manifested to the human sense. The 
earths, air, water, are trinities, or rather tri- unities. 
They have qualities as 'unities and qualities as tri- 
Tinitties. The elements of things were not designed 
to exist alone. They seek tri-imity in one spirit 
by their inherent afSmities. And in tri-unity alone 
is nature practically adapted to humanity. Phys- 
ical nature is mostly manifested by tri-unity. 

The evangelical view of the Godhead does not 
need that we should plead this analogy in its sup- 
port ; but the fact that matter is manifested, in 
many instances, by a tri-unity, and that the nature 
of elementary things is such that they seek union 
in a trinity, and that it is only in this form that 
they have, for the most part, a practical value and 
relation to other things — this, we affirm, proves this 
much, viz., the analogies of the physical world are 
opposed to those who argue from nature, as you 
do, for absolute unity in the manifestation or in 
the nature of Grod. The awful solitude of one in- 
dividual elementary essence is a thought against 
which the heart reluctates. God is a social being ; 



TEI-U^riTY OF THE DIVIDE MIXD. 67 

and the tri-iinitj of his nature alone enables us to 
conceive of him as such. 

As you have introduced this form of illustration, 
suppose we look into the intellectual world, and in- 
quire whether there are not analogies here that 
connect themselves with this subject ? 

Reason is an absolute unity. Love is an absolute 
unity. Will is an absolute unity. These are the 
same in themselves, and the same in all moral 
beings. They are separable from each other, and 
yet united in one consciousness. Human reason, 
love, and will, are finite, and they may be perverted 
in finite beings, but they are the same in their nature 
whether they inhere in an infinite or in a finite being* 

The eldest Scripture declares that man was 
created in the moral imao'e of God. To infer, 
therefore, the moral nature of the ]\Iaker from the 
moral nature of man, is not only warranted by the 
fact that reason^ luill^ and love must be the same in 
kind in all beings, but it is warranted likewise by 
the statements of revelation. Now, while we do 
not find the human nature manifesting itself tri- 
personally, as the divine does, yet we do find hu- 
manity manifested in a tri-partite form. And thus 
reason has a basis in the one for accepting what is 
revealed concerning the other. 



68 TEI-UNITY OF THE DIVINE MIND. 

Man is one in nature. He is conscious of oneness 
in himself ; while yet his nature is such that it can 
be made known or revealed to others only by a tri- 
fold manifestation. To love is a different thing from 
to hnow; and to hnow differs both from to ivill and 
to love; yet it is the one man that thinks, wdlls. and 
loves. And not only this, but while these powers 
of the human mind are diverse from each other, 
yet the whole man acts in each of them — the whole 
man thinks^ wills, or loves. 

We may know a man by his intellectual mani- 
festation, w^hile we know little or nothing of his 
affections and wall — no thin o' of his moral character. 

o 

This is experienced sometimes w^hen we read an 
unknown author. We only know a man's nature 
truly when he has revealed himself to us in his 
threefold manifestation of intellect, sensibility, and 
will. 

This analogy is bu.t introductory. It does not, 
in my opinion, give a correct idea of the Trinity. 
A better analogy than this can be derived from the 
economy of moral natures. The logos of the mind 
(or the mental exercises or ideas) is not the same 
as the conscious I in the soul of man. Thought is 
born of man's conscious nature as the light is born 
of the sun. But in moral beings there is some-» 



TEI-UXITY OF THE DIYIIn'E MI]S^D. 69 

tiling that stands in the nature back of thought, and 
judges of its character and fitness. I see my 
thoughts and judge of them.-''' The I that sees 
and judges of the product of the mind is as sepa- 
rate from the thought, in one sense, as the subject 
is from the object. In their relation to each other, 
the one is begotten of the substance of the other ; 
yet they are in a true sense one — one is the mani- 
festation of the other — one is the vital image or 
living exhihition of the other. The unknown one in 
the human or in the divine nature can be made 
known only by this manifestation, and yet the true 
character of this logos, or son of the mind, is known 
only to the unknown one. As saith the Messiah, 
^'l\o man knoweth the Son but the Father; and 
no man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to 
whomsoever the Son will reveal him." 

Again, v/hile the logos, or conceived ideas, i^ 
neither the affections nor the will^ yet \Yill and 
affection are manifested throup;h and bv the intel- 
ligence. The logos is the out-birth of the moral 
nature, and it is through the logos that the tender- 

* This thought undoubtedly possessed Richard Baxter when he 
advised his friends "to be none of those who shall charge with 
heresy all who say the three persons in the G-odhead are — God un- 
derstanding himself, God understood by Mraself and G-od loving him- 
self." 



70 



TR I- UNITY OF THE DIYIKE 



ness of the affection and the determination of the 
will are made known to others. The logos is an 
out-birth. "Will and love are a jDrocession of the 
moral nature through the logos. They are seen in 
the intelligencej and manifested by it."^ 

The Scriptural statement then may be affirmed as 
profoundly accordant with the analogies of nature. 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
was with God, and the Word was God." 

Then there is the Word conceived, and the 
Word revealed or manifested.f 

* W^e purposely, for the roost part, avoid the irhperfect definitions 
of mental philosophy, and use such words as we hope may be plain 
to common readers. Such as will refer each reader to his own 
consciousness. 

f Matthew Henry, the best read in the Bible of all the commen- 
tators, has clearly conceived and distinctly stated the inspired con- 
ception in the first of John. We give the passage in fuU, for the 
benefit of any who seldom refer to this most biblical of all the com- 
mentators. 

"The Chaldee paraphrase very frequently calls the Messia the 
Word of Jehovah^ and speaks of many things in the Old Testament 
said to be done by the Lord^ as done by the Word of the Lord. 
Even the vulgar Jews were taught that the Word of God was the 
same with God. The evangelist, in the close of his discourse (v. 18), 
plainly tells us why he caUs Christ the Word of God — because he is 
" the only -begotten Son luhich is in the bosom of the Father, and has de- 
clared him. Word is two-fold ; word conceived and loord uttered. 

(1 .) There is the icord conceived : that is thought, which is the only 
immediate product of the soul (all the operations of which are per- 
formed by thought), and it is one with the soul. Thus the second 
person in the Trinity is. fitly called the Word ; for he is the first- 



TRI-UNITY OF THE DIYIKE MIND. 71 



Some passages from tlae ancients, held at the 
time when the primitive church was exercising the 
power which converted the world, will give the 
mode of thinking among the best men of that 
age. 

The following beautifal passage is a true trans- 
lation from the Exhortation of Clement of Alexan- 
dria to the Greeks : The divine Logos — the 
Christ — was the cause of our being, and onr well- 
being also, for he was in God; and now this Logos 
himself appears to men ; the only being that ever 
partook of both natures, as well that of God as of 
man ; to be the cause of all good to us. From him 

legotten of the Father ; that eternal wisdom which the Lord possessed, 
as the soul doth its thought, in the beginning of his way, Prov. viii. 
22. There is nothing we are more sure of than ^hat we think, yet 
nothing we are more in the dark about than how we think; who can 
declare the generation of thought in the soul ? Surely then the gen- 
erations and births of the eternal mind may well be allowed to be 
great mysteries of godliness, which we can not fathom, while yet we 
adore the depth. 

(2.) There is the luord uttered, and that is speech. Thus Christ is 
the Wordj, for by him God has in these last days spoken to us (Heb. 
i. 2), and has directed us to hear him, Matt. xvii. 5. He has made 
known God's mind to us, as a man's word or speech makes known 
his thoughts, as far as he pleases, and no farther. Christ is called 
that vjonderful speaker (Dan. yiii. 23), the speaker of things hidden 
and strange. He is the Word speaking /ro??^ God to us, and to God 
for us. John Baptist was the voice ; but Christ the Word ; being the 
Word, he is the Truth, the Amen, the faithful Witness of the mind of 
God.'' 



72 TEI-UNITY OF THE DIVINE MIND. 



we learn to live virtuously ; by tim we are con- 
ducted in the way of eternal life ; as saitli tlie 
divine apostle of the Lord, ' The love of God the 
Saviour was manifested to all men, instructing us 
in order that we having abjured all impiety and 
worldly desires, we might live soberly and piously 
in this world, expecting in blessed hope the mani- 
festation of the glory of our great God and Saviour 
Jesus Christ.' " 

Tertullian says : ^' The Greeks term that Logos 
which we translate Word, and thus our people 
[i. e. the Christians], for brevity sake, say, ^In the 
beginning the Word was with God,' though it 
would be more proper to say reason [or thought], 
since God was not speaking from the beginning, 
although rational. ^ ^ Considering, there- 
fore, and disposing by his reason, he effected his 
will by his Word, which thou mayest easily under- 
stand by what passes in thyself ^ -s^- -s^- when 
thou conferrest silently with thine own reason." — 
TertuU. ad.v, Praxeam^ c. v. 

Says Justin^ Ap. ii. : It is not allowable, there: 
fore, to think otherwise of the Spirit and the Power 
which is in God, than that it is the Logos, which 
also is the first-born of God." 

That distinction in the nature of God which 



TRI-UNITY OF THE DIVINE MIND. 73 

"would lead to his development as Father, Son, and 
Holy Spirit, and which fitted him for this, existed 
from all eternity, and was an inseparable part of 
his nature ; but Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in 
the full sense of the economy of the gospel, he 
actually was not^ until the incarnation of the Logos, 
and the outpouring of the Spirit had been actually 
completed." — Moses Stuart 

The origin of the conceived "Word is as old as 
the divine mind. He was in the beginning with 
God — the eternally-begotten Son of the Father. 
But the revealed or manifested Word is no older 
in his relations to men than the time when the 
character of the mind is manifested to others by its 
Logos. No man hath seen God at any time ; the 
only-begotten Son, which IS in the bosom of the Father, 
he hath declared him^ 

Man can embody his logos impersonally in writ- 
ten language, and send it thus embodied to all 
nations who understand the written character. 
Why then might not the Word of God become 
flesh ?" Why might not the Son of God thus be- 
come personally incarnate, so that the affections 
and will of the Father might be expressed in him 
and through him, not impersonally but personally, 
in life and power ? The Scriptures affirm, what a 

4 



74 TRI-UNITY OF THE DIVINE MIND. 

true reason approves, that the Word of God did 
become flesh, and that Christ is the out-shining 
of the Father's glory, and the express image of his 
person." He that hath seen Christ hath seen the 
Father." The embodiment of man's logos in lan- 
guage is only vital with intelligence. The embodi- 
ment of the divine logos is the revealment of the 
" fullness of the Godhead bodily" — 'the logos in a 
nature in which can be manifested not only the in- 
telHgence but the affection and will of God. 

Let us advance one step further, and look at this 
thought in another aspect. Jesus said to his dis- 
ciples. It is expedient for you that I go away, for 
if I go not away, the Holy Spirit, or Comforter, will 
not come unto you ; but if I go away I will send 
him unto you ; and when he is come, he will not 
speak of himself, but he will take of the things 
that belong to me, and show them unto you." 

Thus the Spirit is represented not as a revealer 
of new truth, but as a personal procession from the 
Father through the Son into the hearts of believers. 
He takes the facts furnished by the Logos, and, by 
a revealment of life and love, gives efl&cacy (as di- 
vine power and love alone can do) to the truth as 
it is in Jesus. The Son is eternally -begotten of the 
Father — ^the same in nature with him, and the only 



TRI-UKITY OF THE DIVIKE MIND. 75 

revealer of the Father. The Holy Spirit comes to 
us in power and love, baptized in the humanities 
of Christ, being revealed in and through the Son. 
Christ furnishes the material for redemption — the 
facts which reveal the divine nature. The Holy 
Spirit applies them in the soul. Hence, Christ and 
the Holy Spirit dwelling in believers are inter- 
changeable terms in the New Testament. The 
Father and the Son are likewise interchangeable. 

I am in the Father and the Father in me." So 
" the grace of our "Lord Jesus Christ, and the love 
of God the Father, and the communion of the Holy 
Ghost," are with those who believe. Such, un- 
doubtedly, is the apostolic conception. 

Let us look again into the human consciousness, 
and listen again to the voice of reason, while we 
consider revealed truth in another aspect. 

Human nature, as constituted by its Maker, 
would certainly be fitted to appreciate the divine 
character. The moral relations between God and 
man, the one being a sovereign, the other a subject, 
require this ; and the fitness of things observable 
throughout the creation, assure us of the fact. An 
argument, therefore, for the trinity may be found in 
its adaptations to the mental constitution and moral 
necessities of man. Let us inquire then for tho 



76 TEI-UNITY OF THE DIVINE MIND. 



value of tlie doctrine as adapted to meet tlie finite 
apprehension of men, and to aid them in approxi- 
mating a knowledge of the character of God. 

The mind of man has a logical conformation. It 
is made to ratiocinate, to develop processes of syn- 
thesis, analysis, and generalization. In studying 
the nature of any thing, we combine its manifesta- 
tions, or phenomena, and thus gain a knowledge 
of its true character. This beiog the character of 
the mind, it is adapted by its constitution to attain 
ultimate knowledge of God through the revealed 
doctrine of the Trinity, in the same way by which 
it attains knowledge of other things, that is, hy the 
exercise of its rational powers , If the knowledge of 
God's character^ as well as his heing^ were by intu- 
ition, as Mr. Parker teaches, man would not know 
the character of God as a reasoning being, but as an 
unreasoning animal. 

The character of God is adapted to regenerate 
nature, and adapted to regenerated nature ; hence 
man's rational nature is profoundly adapted to the 
doctrine of the Trinity. The mind of man can not 
apprehend th*e divine character, nor the relations 
of God to his creatures, by a single conception. 
Even the character and relations of an earthly 
ruler can not be compassed by one view of the 



TKI-UNITY OF THE DIYIXE MIND. 77 

mind. Victoria is not only Regina^ but slie is De- 
fender of the Faitli and patroness of the great 
charities of her queendom. (We speak of Victoria 
because she is a rare instance of a virtuous sove- 
reign, while she combines in her person regal, spir- 
itual, and benevolent prerogative.) In order to 
form a true idea of the character of this sovereign, 
and of her relations to her realm, \ye must form the 
distinct conception of three regal offices, and of the 
queen acting x^ersonaUy in each of these, and then 
combine these several conceptions in one charac- 
ter."^ By this illustration we do not, of course, 
mean to be understood that the Chiist-hood is only 
God acting officially : while this is true, yet it is, as 
we have shown, also true that Christ is Logos — the 
revealer of the Godhead bodily and personally. 
The statement is presented to prove a fact w^iich is 
verified in the experience of every man — (a fact, 
the consideration of which ought to influence the 
mind of skeptics to a right conclusion) — that the 
mind of man is so constituted, that the triune 

* It would, perhaps, be more proper to say that person is an in- 
taition or coetaueous conception always present in the mind when 
v,-e conceive of a moral being ; and the three offices attach them- 
selves by a mental necessity to the one name of "Victoria ; and then 
the character of Victoria must be derived from her action in them 
alL 



78 TRI-UNITY OF THE DIYINE MIND. 

manifestation of God is adapted to enable him as a 
rational being to comprebend God ; and that by 
tbis manifestation be can approximate tbe absolute 
truth, far beyond any attainment he could make by 
his own unaided conception. 

That man can have no just idea of God who- en- 
deavors to compass the divine mind in a single 
thought. The bare idea of power and Godhead 
transfers the mind back from the third to the first 
dispensation, when the Almighty was known as 
God of Creation only ; not as Jehovah, more per- 
fectly revealed to Moses, in the second dispensa- 
tion ; nor as God in Christ, most perfectly revealed 
in the New Testament. After we have appre- 
hended God as the Father Almighty, and conceived 
of him as truth and love in Christ, and as an every- 
where-present life and power in the Spirit ; after 
the soul has appreciated and appropriated, by faith, 
all that there is in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, 
then only it has arisen to the best knowledge that a 
finite mind can gain of the character of the true 
God. Hence it is written, Go teach all nations, 
baptizing them into the ONE name but three per- 
50715— the Father, the SoiT, the Holy Ghost — 
and lo ! I am with you always, even to the end 
of the dispensation." 



TEI-UXITT OF THE DIYIXE MIND. 79 

The Christian alone vrho has faith in the Trin- 
ity, as revealed in the New Testament, obtains an 
adequate and vitalizing knowledge of God. Tlie 
God of one intuition or concej^tion is an abstract nul- 
lity^ devoid of all moral poiver over human character 
and human life. The God of one intuition, with 
the superadded characteristics which man's folly or 
his philosophy always frames when he is devoid, 
of faith in revelation, is more or less an erroneous 
and corrupting conce|)tion. Christianity alone en- 
lightens the natural mind, guides the reason, and 
matures the conception of the divine character. 
Hence the idea of God, as conceived by such men 
as Mr. Parker, who reject revealed religion, is in- 
congruous and foolish. The Christian alone rises 
by faith to a knowled^'e of the living and true God, 
clothed in his attributes of power, light, and love. 

Shall we not, then, my dear sir, turn away from 
the hallucinations of the skeptics, and the moon- 
shine rationalisms of the transcendentalists, and 
seek in the Scriptures the knowledge of God, 
" whom to know AEIGHT is life eternal." 

Yours in defense of revealed, rational, and spirit- 
ually-efficacious Christianity, • 



LETTEE VL 



DEPRAYITT. 

MyDearSie: — 

The doctrine of linman depravity is rejected 
contemptuously by the skeptics of our day ; and with 
these there are many good and thoughtful men who 
misapprehend its import, and hence doubt of its 
truth. This latter class is led into doubt upon this 
subject about as much by the overstrained defini- 
tion of some orthodox preachers, as they are by the 
same fault on the part of those who oppose Chris- 
tianity as a system of revealed religion. 

There is a basis in human reason and experience, 
as well as in revelation, for this doctrine ; and nei- 
ther the misstatements of the friends of Christianity, 
nor the maZ-statements of its enemies, can invalidate 
the facts and reasons upon which the doctrine 
rests. 

The statement that men are by nature averse to 
all good, and as evil as it is possible for them to 
be, is not true to the common sense of men, nor in 



DEPRAVITY. 



81 



the common use of language. Sucli expressions 
may be explained into accordance witli tlie Scrip- 
tures, but it is far better to avoid the extreme ex- 
pression to which every denomination (from the 
very nature of selfishness) is prone to carry its 
own distinguishing tenets, and present the Christian 
doctrines in such phraseology as flJls clearly within 
the import of the facts and texts upon which they 
are grounded. 

While, therefore, there may be some apology for 
misapprehension on this subject, there can be no 
good apology for such mal-statement as that of 
Mr. Parker to which we have already alluded, viz., 

The popular religion is hostile to man ; tells us 
he is an outcast ; not a child of Grod, lut a sjvurious 
issue of the cZea7." 

The most trustworthy writers on this subject 
always state the question in its connections, and 
with the limitations which experience and the Bible 
require. Dr. Chalmers, in speaking of those who 
are unregenerated, says : " The principle upon 
which you may have acted may be respectable and 
honorable and amiable. We are not disputing all 
this. We are only saying that it is not the love 
of God. And should we hear any one of you as- 
sert that I have nothing to reproach myself with, 

4* 



82 



DEPRAVITY. 



and tliat I give every body their own, and tliat I 
possess a fair character in society, and have done 
nothing to forfeit it ; and that I have my share of 
generosity and honor, of tenderness and civihty : 
our only reply is, that this may be very true ; you 
may have a very large share of these and of other 
estimable principles, but along with the possession 
of these many things, you may lack one thing, and 
that one thing may be the love of God. An en- 
lightened discerner of the heart may look into you 
and say with our Saviour, ^ I know you that ye 
have not the love of God in you.' " 

We will give another extract from a writer gen- 
erally accepted among evangelical Christians — one 
of the most clear-minded and pure-hearted men of 
his age. These extracts are given at length, in 
order that you may consider this subject unbiased 
by the opinion that the views which we shall pre- 
sent do not apply to the subject as generally re- 
ceived by enlightened Christians. 

We do not, as we have already said, present our 
views as an exposition of the symbols of any one 
denomination — some of the creeds were wrought 
out by good men in a darker age than the present. 
We write to show that the doctrine of human de- 
pravity, as revealed in the Scriptures and ex- 



DEPEAYITY. 



83 



pounded by men of spiritual apprehension, accords 
with reason and with human experience. 

Dr, Dwight says : The human character is not 
depraved to the full extent of the human 'powers. It 
has been said, neither unfrequently nor by men 
void of understanding, that man is as depraved a 
being as his faculties will permit him to be ; but 
this has been said without consideration and with- 
out truth. Neither Scripture nor experience war- 
rant the assertion. ^ Wicked men and deceivers,' 
it is declared, ^ wax worse and worse, deceiving 
and being deceived.' During the first half of hu- 
man life this may, perhaps, be explained by the 
growth of the faculties, but during a considerable 
period preceding its termination it can not thus be 
explained, for the faculties decay while the de- 
pravity still increases." The young man who 
came to Christ to know what good thing he should 
do to inherit eternal life, was certainly less de- 
praved than his talents would have permitted him 
to be. 

Like him, we see daily many men who neither 
are nor profess to be Christians, and who, instead 
of being wicked to a degree commensurate with 
their faculties, go through life in the exercise of dis- 
positions so sincere, just, and amiable, and in the 



84 



D E PEAYITY. 



performance of actions so npriglit and beneficent, 
as to secure a liigli degree of respect and affection 
from ourselves, and from all with whom they are 
connected. It certainly can not be said that such 
men are as sinful as many others possessed of 
powers far inferior, much less that they are as sin- 
ful as they can be. Those who make the assertion 
against which I am contending, will find them- 
selves, if they will examine, rarely believing that 
their wives and children, though not Christians, are 
fiends." 

Again, Dr. Dwight says: "Some of the natural 
human characteristics are amiable. Such are natu- 
ral afiection ; the simplicity and sweetness of dis- 
position in children, often found also in persons of 
adult years ; compassion, generosity, modesty, and 
what is sometimes called natural conscientiousness^ 
that is, a fixed and strong sense of the importance 
of doing that which is right. These characteristics 
appear to have adorned the young man whom I 
have already mentioned. We know that they are 
amiable, because we are informed that ^ Jesus, 
holding him^ loved JiiviJ In the same manner we, 
and all others who are not abandoned, love them 
always and irresistibly, whenever they are pre- 
sent'v d to our view. They all, also, are required, 



D EPRAYIT Y. 



85 



and exist in every Christian, enhancing his holiness 
and rendering him a better man. TTithoiit them it 
is not easy to perceive how the Christian character 
could exist. Accordingly, Saint Panl exhibits 
those who are destitute of these attributes as being 
literally profligates." 

J£j then, the doctrine of human depravity, as ex- 
pounded by the accepted teachers of the orthodox 
faith, does not affirm that man's faculties are 
wholly depraved ; if it be a manifest and indubit- 
able fact that men may possess by nature many ex- 
cellent and amiable qualities for which we ought to 
love them ; what then is the scriptural, rational, 
and experimental import of the doctrine of human 
depravity, and in what sense are all men de- 
praved ? 

It is affirmed in the Scriptures, and Mr. Parker 
adopts the principle as a tenet of absolute religion, 
that man shall love God with all his heart, and his 
neighbor as himself. Of the obligation of this- re- 
quirement there can be no doubt. God is the 
supreme being, and the best being, and, therefore, 
of right demands supreme love. The interests of 
other men are as valuable to them as our interests 
are to us ; hence they should be regarded equally 
with our own. This is the moral law of the uni- 



86 



DEPRAVITY, 



verse. To ttis all agree. Now, the question is not 
v\^lietlier some men have not by nature many good 
qualities, nor whether any man is as bad as he 
could be ? But the question is, whether men do hy 
nature love and ohey God? whether they are hy nature- 
conformed or imconformed to the moral law of God ? 

The question^ when fairly stated, is a very plain 
one ; and the man who doubts of human depravity 
in the light of a true statement, can have but little 
apprehension either of God's character or of his 
own. If men loved and obeyed the true God by 
nature, they would have to make an effort not to 
love and obey him. Every body knows that the 
reverse of this is true, and that the effort is on the 
other side of the question. But while argument 
may not make a palpable experience more plain to 
Christians, it may promote right conviction with^ 
those who are not. Let us, then, look first at the 
testimony of universal consciousness. 

I need not recite to you those passages from the 
ancient classics with which you are more familiar 
than I am mjself. Epictetus, speaking of the con- 
sciousness of every natural mind in which the 
moral sense is not obliterated, says, almost in the 
words of Paul, or rather Paul says, almost in his 
words, He that sins does not what he would, but 



DEPE AVIT Y. 



87 



what lie would not, that he does." In accordance 
with this speak all the worthy ancients who have 
given us their self-consciousness on moral subjects. 

Take again the testimony of universal history. 
It can not be doubted that humanity has always 
been found by the light of history and revelation 
in a corrupted moral state. We mean, distinctly, 
in a state entirely destitute of sujoreme love to God 
as a holy sovereign, and to men as brothers. That 
civilization made progress in some old nations — that 
intellectual light and a perception of moral truths 
were in some minds clear and strong, is granted; 
but the knowledge of Gocl, the disposition to love 
men as brethreu, and a prevalent regard for moral 
purity, is not the natural state of man. The fact is 
striking as it is indubitable, that the most enlight- 
ened nations, as they increased in years, have in- 
variably, without the aid of revelation, become 
more corrupt. And as they added years, they 
added evil to their national life. (Vide Phil. Plan 
Sal., ch. i.) And even now, in lands professing to 
receive the religion of Christ, and among those who 
recognize the obligation to love God as the com- 
mon Father, and all men as brethren — even in 
Christendom, notwithstanding an assent to right 
principles, war and lust, pride and self-seeking, are 



88 



D EPR AY IT Y. 



tLe rule, and obedience to the recognized moral 
law of love is tlie exception. 

Leaving the universal law of love out of the 
question, which is the recognized standard of duty, 
and to which man would be conformed if he, by 
nature, knew and obeyed the true God — even set- 
ting this aside, it is true that men have in all ages 
been conscious of being unconformed to their own 
hnowledge of duty. This is evidenced by the fact, 
that the human consciousness of sin in all time 
(until Christ's sacrifice) has been evinced by the 
sacrifice of victims, human and bestial, as expiatory 
or propitiatory ofierings, to procure reconciliation 
with God. 

This testimony of universal consciousness, uni- 
versal history, and universal conduct, can not go for 
nothing. To make a light thing of the deepest 
and most solemnly-expressed convictions of human 
nature, is to be untrue to humanity as it is. The 
human consciousness cries out for reconciliation 
with God. The man who ans>7ers that it needs 
none, is as injurious to the soul as a physician 
would be to the body, who, in a dangerous mal- 
ady, should give opiates, and let the disease take 
its course. 

But in view of Mr. Parker's own theories, how 



DE PR AVIT Y. 



89 



can lie avoid admitting the total depravity of hu- 
man nature ? Indeed, it is true that he, in state- 
ment, apparently unconscious that almost his whole 
book is in contradiction to this, utters words affirm- 
ing the depravity of humanity and the necessity of 
Christ's death. He says (p. 467), The history of 
society is summed up in a word — Cai/i Jdlled Abel, 
That of real Christianity also in a word — Christ 
died for his Irothersy 

The direct inference from Mr. Parker's philoso- 
phy goes likewise to establish thfe opposite of what 
he believes. If man has by intuition, or in some 
other way, a " true idea of Gocl, which is the same 
in all men,'' then it follows as a fact corroborated 
by all history, that man must have propensities so 
totally depraved that they lead him to reject the 
true knowledge of the di^dne, and plunge into 
darkness and evil, notwithstanding the counter in- 
fluence of Mr. Parker s absolute religion. If this 
be not an evidence of depravity, we would humbly 
inquire what can be evidence in the case ? 

Perhaps Mr. Parker would refer us to the con- 
ception which he says man gets from nature, and 
then tell us that the conception obscures the intu- 
ition. Then, two things follow — first, that all na- 
ture is depraved from which man gets the obscur- 



90 



DEPRAVITY. 



ing conception ; and, second, that Grod lias given 
man a true idea of himself, which is not strong 
enough to resist the depraving power of depraved 
nature. Yet Mr. Parker affirms ^' the popular doc- 
trine of depravity" to be a No-fact J'^ 

But let us turn from the variations" found in 
the Discourses of Eeligion,'' and look at the ap- 
peal which may be made to each individuars con- 
sciousness in behalf of the doctrine of depravity. 

Men will acknowledge that they do not live up - 
to the amount of their knowledge — that they do 
not live up to their ability — that they do not live 
up to their conscience. Now, what is the reason 
of this? Who will answer? The brute lives up 
to the best instincts of his nature. The brute con- 
forms by nature to the laws of his highest life and 
happiness. Why is not man thus conformed to 
the moral law of love ? Why does he not by na- 
ture live a life like Christ ? Let the reader frankly 
acknowledge that it is because the current of the 
human will runs in another direction. Hence it is 
the experience of every living man who seeks con- 
formity to the will of God, that he must struggle 
against the inertia and earthly and selfish propen- 
sions of his natural mind. And it is likewise, as 
we believe, an experience, that divine aid alone 



DEPEAV IT Y. 



91 



enables the soul to rise above the natural into the 
spiritual life. 

We repeat, if there be any thing plain in the 
Scriptures, it is the struggle or spiritual warfare 
that is necessary to attain and :maixtaix conformity 
to the will of God as manifested in Christ. If there 
be any thing true in Christian exjjerience it is this 
same warfare — a warfare which reaches a conscious 
and joyful triumph only by faith in Christ, as a 
present divine Saviour. If men by nature be not 
out of conformity with the law of Grod, then the 
whole tenor of the New Testament and all Christian 
experience are together false, because the one af- 
firms what the other realizes. 

But it is not possible to lead any man who has 
ever seriously endeavored to be like Christ, to 
doubt that by nature his will is alienated from the 
life of God." Transcendentalism may lead men of no 
Christian jpurpose to douhtj hut it can do no more. 
The man who permits his boat to float upon the 
current of Lake Superior will move downward 
without an effort to the more rapid current of the 
Niagara river. He can not be conscious of my 
effort, because he makes none. It requires no ef- 
fort to float with the current. But if a man will 
save himself from going over the falls, he must 



92 



DEPRAVITY. 



turn his boat against tlie stream, and his labors will 
grow light, and his hope and peace will increase, as 
he escapes the dangerous current, and sees on the 
farthermost verge of the lake the light-house of the 
homeward-bound. So the Christian who has strug- 
gled against the natural current of the will, finds 
peace as he overcomes, and rejoices as the light 
grows brighter which shines out from the light- 
house in the sky." 

The teachings of the Scriptures on this subject 
not only accord with experience, but they contain 
a profound philosophy, which will, by some future 
writer, be developed in a more satisfactory manner 
than it is at present. Allow me, in conclusion, an 
allusion to this philosophy. 

Adam, the origin of our transmitted humanity, is 
said to have been a living soul." Christ, the 
source of our spiritual and eternal life^ is a quick- 
ening Spirit." We inherit from Adam an earthly 
nature, whose appetites, motives, aspirations, are 
limited to the earth. This is, in the language of 
the New Testament, the natural mind," the old 
man," the flesh." The first birth is natural, and 
gives to man only earthly and selfish instincts and 
aspirations. Man by nature may be an amiable 
and excellent earthly being, or he may be a morally 



D EPR ATIT Y. 



93 



deformed and despicable one ; but still lie is ^' of 
the earth eartbv,'' and, as Jesus affirmed, the love 
of God is not in him.'' He is ''alive" to earthly 
and selfish motives and objects ; but he is dead 
unto God;" he does not feel and move in view of 
what God is, nor in view of what he has com- 
manded. In his mind his own icUJ^ not the will of 
God, is supreme; and he resists subjection to the 
will of God as much as an animal {f-re naturce)^ 
wild hy nature^ resists subjection to the will of man. 
The divine Teacher affirmed the foundational truth 
on this subject when he said, ^' That which is born 
of the flesh is flesh, that which is born of the 
Spirit is spirit." 

Christ is a ''life-giving Spirit;" and the new 
spiritual life which proceeds from him is superin- 
duced upon an animal or earthly nature. Chris- 
tians are twice born — first by nature — again by 
Spirit. By the second birth, the soul that was 
spiritually dead before, begins to live and move 
in view of God's character, will, and manifested 
benevolence in Christ. By the first birth every 
man has the mental and fleshly nature of Adam ; 
by the second birth every believer has in him the 
spiritual lineaments of Christ. This new divine 
nature is developed out of the old earthly nature, 



94 



DEPEAYITY. 



or superindnced upon it. As the chrysalis has the 
lineaments of the butterfly within it, while yet it 
retains the body, and, to some extent, the instincts 
of the caterpillar, so the Christian has the spirit- 
ual lineaments of Christ formed in his soul while 
yet he retains the earthly nature of his earthly 
progenitor. In the resurrection the' spiritual soul, 
disenthralled from its Adamic corporeity, will 
assimilate to itself, by divine power, a body of a 
spiritual nature, adapted to the propensions of its 
new spiritual life, fashioned like unto Christ's 
glorious body." Hence, the " image of Christ 
formed in the soul" here^ is the only hope of glory''' 
hereafter. 

The spiritual and the earthly nature — the one 
being superinduced upon the other — are antagonis- 
tic the one to the other. It is reasonable to sup- 
pose that, as in the lipodeptera, the rudiments of 
the winged insect prevail against the worm from 
which it is developed, the antagonistic efforts of the 
two opposing instincts are felt^ and the one prevails 
over the other with a struggle ; so, in the case of 
those who are '^born of the Spirit," *'the flesh 
lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the 
flesh, and these are contrary the one to the other." 

When a man is born again, the two natures are 



DEPRAVITY. 



95 



distinctly marked by the diverse aliment upon 
whicli they live. The natural mind lives on natu- 
ral aliment, and seeks its highest good on earth. 
The spiritual mind grows and develops itself by 
truth. The new nature draws its life from Christ. 
The conscience, the affections, and the will, live 
and move in view of God in Christ. God becomes 
the spiritual Father of the spiritual soul, and the 
new-created" is a son. Truth is eternal — Christ 
is eternal. Hence, the soul which lives on this 
aliment has eternal life. Jesus said, am the 
hreadoflife^ of which if a man eat he shall never die^ 
hut shall have everlasting life.'''' The natural man 
liveth by bread alone," but the Christian liveth 
by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth 
of God." 

In the light of this philosophy, which is discrim- 
inatingly true to the Scriptures, we may see the 
reason and the necessity of the doctrine of the 
divine Spirit. The glory of the gospel is in its 
power, offered at this point, to transform the hu- 
man soul from the habitudes of an earthly to that 
of a spiritual life. A nature can not transform 
itself. One species can not produce another. The 
instincts of the earthly nature can not turn against 
themselves. The germ of the new nature must be 



96 



DEPRAVITY. 



^'begotten'' in order to prevail against the old. 
When the new nature is begotten^ the old nature 
becomes as a body of death, until the new rises 
above it, and brings it into subserviency. 

The Scriptures exhibit this subject more dis- 
tinctly than I am able to do. I will close this long 
letter with a quotation, and some inferences from it. 

The apostle, in his letter to the Eomans, says : 
" There is, therefore, now no condemnation to them 
which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the 
flesh, but after the Spirit ; for the law of the Spirit 
of Life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the 
law of sin and death. For what the law could not 
do in that it was weak through the flesh [or because 
of the earthly nature], God sending his own Son 
in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin [as a sac- 
rifice for sin], condemned sin in the flesh, that the 
righteousness of the law may be fulfilled in us, 
who walk, not after the flesh but after the Spirit 
[i. e. not after the old nature, but the new]. For 
they who have only the earthly nature — ' are 
earthly' — do interest themselves only in the things 
of the earth ; and they that have the spiritual na- 
ture are interested in the things of the Spirit. For 
to be carnally-minded is death. [Those who are 
governed only by earthly and selfish motives and 



DEPRAVITY. 



97 



aims are spiritually dead.] But to be spiritually- 
minded is life and jjeace. For the carnal mind is 
enmity against Gocl. It is not subject to his law, 
neither indeed can be. So then, they that are in 
the flesh [or natural state] can not please God. 

But if the Spirit of him that liaised u-p Jesus 
Ch rist from the dead dwell in you, he that ra ised up 
Christ from the dead shall also quichen your mortal 
bodies hy his Spirit that diuelleth in you^ 

Look a moment at one or two of the points in 
this passage. 

The law can give knowledge of duty, but it can 

not beget life. It can show us the evil, but it can 

not beget the disposition to overcome the evil. It 

is not knowledge that men want, but strength to do 

what they know. The man is a fool who supposes 

that light is love. The law requires love, but it 

can not beget it. Every thing begets its kind. 

Love only can beget love. Hence, Christ crucified 

in the humanity as a sacrifice for sin, is such an 

exhibition of love that it begets love in believers. 

Faith accomplishes ^' what the law could not do." 

Love is life. Love is the fulfilling of the law," 

and hence the law of God is fulfilled in us who 

w^alk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." 

Men by nature are morally dead already," and 

5 



98 



DEPRAVITY. 



have no " eternal life" unless born again by the 
Spirit of Holiness in Christ Jesus. 

In the Christian are the rudiments of a new 
species — a new and higher type of the rational 
order of humanity. His new life is by divine in- 
terposition, but received in accordance with his own 
voluntary powers — begotten by truth and cherished 
by love. The spiritual germ is implanted and de- 
veloped here until it attains the resurrection state — 
i. e. overcomes the habitudes of its earthly body — 
then, in the resurrection, a spiritual body adapted 
to its propensions is given to it. To every seed 
its own [adapted] body." Christ is the head and 
the type of the new creation (shall we say of the 
new species?). Let us rejoice^ my friend. The 
process now developing in Christian minds on the 
earth, will reach, in body and spirit, a glorious con- 
summation in the resurrection of the just. 

Yours, in the hope that we shall awake in his 
likeness, 



LETTER VII. 



recoxciliatiox, ok at-one-ment. 

My Deae Sir : — 

You know tliat the Christian doctrine of 
atonement is held confidingly by the evangelical 
churches ; but, as we have seen, this doctrine is 
determinedly rejected by Mr. Parker and other 
skeptics, as it is likewise by a portion of those call- 
ing themselves Unitarians. 

It should be stated at the outset that the subject 
of sacrifice has its essential relations with the moral 
nature of man — the conscience, the affections, the 
will, rather than with the intellect. The love-power 
of sacrifice when appropriated by faith — its rela- 
tions to man's moral nature, and to God's moral 
government — is too profound to be fully devel- 
oped by mere logical elucidation. The sacrifice of 
Christ is a manifestation of power and love trans- 
ferred by faith to the consciousness of the believer. 
The skeptic can not know this. Hence the main 
evidence is absent in his case. But there are adapt- 



100 KECONCILIATIOlNr, OR AT-OXE-MENT. 

ations of the atonement to imperfect humanity — 
there are grounds of its necessity in moral govern- 
ment, which may be seen by the reason ; and see- 
ing these, a reason that is reverent will accept the 
aid of faith which gives us the substance of what 
the reason had given us distinct indications. 

We inquire, then, is there any thing in the na- 
ture of man which is met only by the sacrifice of 
Christ, offered not for himself, but for those who 
will accept its mercy by faith ? 

It can not be doubted that there is in man a 
consciousness of sin, or of something else (call it 
what you will) that leads him to feel the want of a 
sacrifice — or rather that leads him to sacrifice as a 
means of reconciliation with God. Since the world 
began man has had something in his soul that has 
led him to offer sacrifice. We inquire neither for 
the reason of the fact, nor for the form of the fact, 
but for the fact itself. Men may call the fact pro- 
pitiation, expiation, substitution — by any or all 
these names, still the thing sought by the soul is 
plain: — It is peace with God^ a mitigation of the con- 
sciousness of sin^ reconciliation^ at-one-ment. Super- 
stitious usages have been connected with sacrifice, 
and priestcraft has turned the offering of the sin- 
oppressed soul to a selfish account ; but the perver- 



EECOXCILIATIOX, OR AT-OXE-MEXT. 101 

sion of tlie fact does not ignore the existence of the 
sense of want which has produced in all ages and 
among all nations, the various phenomena of sac- 
rifices. 

The ultimate truth in the case, then, is, that 
there is something in the human soul that leads it 
to seek peace with God by sacrifice. The form 
may be varied never so much. Some may inflict 
torture upon themselves ; some part with, as an of- 
fering, what they deem most precious, even a son 
or a daughter ; some make a pilgrimage ; some 
offer the first-fruits of grain or of cattle. What- 
ever the form, the phenomena are all produced by 
the one want of the sin-conscious soul — a desire 
of peace, or at-one-ment with God. 

The want of atonement felt in the soul is as uni- 
versal as the sense of sin. Man, therefore, as a 
being, naturally seeks reconcihation by sacrifice, be- 
cause his reason, as well as his moral sense, teaches 
him that sin alienates and separates from God. 

In this connection notice an important fact — a 
fact which is evidence not only of the fallen and 
darkened state of the human mind, but likewise of 
the necessity of revelation, especially of the revela- 
tion of the mercy of God by sacrifice. While the 
sense of sin, which is universal, produces in men 



102 EECOKCILIATIOJSr^ OR AT-OJSTE-M ENT. 



the sense of want whicli demands a propitiation, 
yet to offer self, or any object we can call our own, 
produces selfishness and pride in the soul instead 
of benevolence, gratitude, and humility. We feel 
the want of a sacrifice, but nothing we possess pro- 
duces the effect necessary in order to peace of con- 
science and purity of heart. The man who goes 
upon a pilgrimage to Mecca, or to any other shrine, 
especially if he has walked on his knees a part of 
the way, returns to Ms home a censorious and self- 
righteous spirit^ his self-sacrifice having led him 
away from humility, and rendered gratitude im 
possible. He can not he grateful to God for a salva- 
tion which he himself has worked out for himself So 
with the devotee who tortures himself. So in the 
case of those who give, as a propitiation, money or 
cattle. The effect necessarily connected with sacri- 
fice, when that sacrifice is made hy SELF for self, is 
the opposite of that which the sacrifice of Christ for 
the sinner is adapted to produce. The one pro- 
duces self-righteousness and self-dependence — ^the 
other gratitude and dependence on Grod.^ 

This then is the actual condition of man in his 

* It is a singular fact that Mr. Parker makes out, that a " sense 
of dependence" is the ultimate idea in religion (p. 18), and yet dis- 
cards the doctrine which alone produces a sense of dependence. 



EECOXCILIATIOX, OK AT-O^^E-MEXT. 103 

natural state. He has a sense of sin, and the ac- 
companying sense of sacrifice, but the selfish sac- 
rifices to which his natural want leads, produce evil 
and not good in the soul. Instead of rendering a 
man humble and grateful, the sacrifices prompted 
by the natural want, and offered hj self for self, 
produce pride and impiety. It has done so since 
the beginning of the world, and would have con- 
tinued to do so until the end of the world, if divine 
revelation and a divine sacrifice had not revealed 
Christ crucified, which rescues the soul from selfish 
sacrificing. Skeptics can not deny these facts. If 
they reject the gospel solution of them, we defy 
them to furnish any other that does not impugn 
either the justice or the mercy of God ; and thus 
involve the difficulty in deeper darkness, rather 
than resolve it by light and love revealed in " the 
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world/' to 
be testified to all in due time." 

In what way, then, could the natural want of 
propitiation be met, and the soul receive spiritual 
good by the sacrifice ? 

We probably have anticipated the answer to this 
question. But let us look at one or two particulars. 
In the first place, it is necessary, in order to the 
formation of a benevolent character, that the motive 



104 EECONCILIATION-, OE AT- OIsE-MENT. 

of our action be out of self. What I do for another 
makes me more benevolent. What I do from 
selfish motives makes me more selfish. Now the 
man Avho has faith in Christ's love-sacrifice for ns, 
is redeemed from a selfish motive. He labors for 
Christ's sake. Christ's sacrifice moves him. He is 
God-moved, not self moved. Christ becomes mo- 
tive both in the heart and in the will. Faith pro- 
duces gratitude and good works, but works can 
never produce faith. 

The sacrifice of Christ then is a necessary part of 
the moral system which includes man as a sinner. 
Without it the natural sense of sin and depend- 
ence works injury to the human soul. With it the 
sense of sin in believers is canceled by a sense of 
reconciliation, and reason and conscience find rest 
by trust in the divine sacrifice. A sense of depend- 
ence, now, places the soul in its true position. It 
depends not on itself, but on the love of God mani- 
fested in Christ's sacrifice. And every time we 
pray in his name the sense of dependence and 
gratitude is renewed in the mind. 

The introductory dispensation of Moses pro- 
duced, so far as an initiatory process of types and 
figures could produce, the salutary ideas which are 



RECOXCILIATIOX, OR AT-O^^E-]^ENT. 105 

produced nnder tlie Christian dispensation by the 
sacrifice of Christ. 

The faith and ritual of the Mosaic institution was 
such, that the sacrifice offered was not deemed the 
property of the individual, but as belonging to the 
Lord (Exodus, xiii. 11-16). The Lord permitted 
the redemption by sacrifice of the first-born, which 
belonged to him by the most solemn covenant. 
The ceremonial was such that it was to the mind of 
the Jew the Lord's sacrifice, while yet it was per- 
mitted to be offered for a sin or a peace-offering. 
Thus the idea of ownership in the offering was de- 
stroyed by the plan of the Mosaic economy ; hence, 
the concomitant idea of pride and self-righteousness 
could not follow the offerino:. The fee of the sacri- 
fice was in Jehovah, not in the sinner who offered 
it. 

But as a sense of sin would again arise by re- 
newed transgression or omission of known duty, 
hence a succession of sacrifices was the burden of 
the old law. These sacrifices, says the apostle, 
could not make the comers thereunto perfect. The 
renewed sense of sin required a renewed sacrifice. 
The thing needed to meet the want was one sacri- 
fice that could be pleaded perpetually, which would 

thus make the comers perfect, and supersede for- 

5* 



106 HECONCILIATION, OR AT-ONE-MENT. 



ever the offering of sacrifices by the people of God. 
Hence the whole system is fulfilled in the sacrifice 
of Christ. He is ^' the end of the la\Y [of sacrifice] 
to every one that belieyeth." Nor yet (Heb. ix, 
25) that he should offer hiraself often, as the high 
priest entereth into the holy place every year with 
the blood of others ^Vbut now once in the end of 
the dispensation hath he appeared to put away sin 
by the sacrifice of himself" Hence, the blood of 
Christ who by the eternal Spirit offered himself 
without spot unto God, will purge your consciences 
from dead ivorhs to serve the living GodJ'^ 

It is not necessary , to inquire, as some have done, 
whether in the darkness of the age, the divine 
Father adapted the sacrifices which the natural 
want had produced, and which were then existing, 
to the end of initiating the one sacrifice offered by 
the eternal Spirit, which would more perfectly 
purify the conscience and heart, and produce obe- 
dience by a right motive. It is enough to know 
the fact that the sacrifice of Christ does purify the 
heart — speaks peace to the conscience — ^redeems the 
soul from selfish or dead works — and produces 
works of love in those who are servants of the liv- 
ing God. 

There is another aspect of the atonement which is 



RECONCILIATION, OR AT-ONE-MENT. 107 

frequently brought to view in tlie Scriptures, and 
whicli many consider the foundation of its necessity. 

Man has an innate sense of justice and right. 
This is a distinguishing attribute of his moral na- 
ture. A sense of responsibility for all moral action 
of which conscience takes cognizance is based upon 
it. A sense of the evil and desert of sin arises, in 
a great measure, from the sense of justice, which is 
in conflict with sin. Law is the development of 
justice, as benevolence is the development of love. 
Love often develops itself in acts which are superior 
to law, because they are acts of self-denial which 
the law or justice does not demand. But laws are 
the immutable rules of the creation, physical and 
moral ; and mercy is never rightly exercised ex- 
cept it be to bring the ignorant and erring back to 
light and law. Justice, then, underlies mercy, and 
mercy is exercised in maintainance of the principles 
of eternal justice. Mercy rises above the law only 
to bring back the transgressor into conformity to law. 

Now, God having given to man this foundational 
sense of justice, would not violate it by atonement 
or in any other way. Beside, God himself pos- 
sesses the attribute of justice, and his moral govern- 
ment, even in the administration of mercy, must 
be based upon it. 



108 EECONCILIATION, OR AT-ONE-MENT. 

The principle of justice, then, whicli develops 
itself in law can not be sacrificed to the power of 
mercy which develops itself in benevolence ; not- 
withstanding benevolence often rises above the re- 
quirements of law. Nor can the one produce the 
effects which the other does in the human mind. 
Gratitude can not be exercised fully for an action 
in others v/hich the law requires of them. We 
must see in the act something of the mercy which 
produces acts of personal self denial for us, before 
gratitude flows spontaneously. But the being who, 
while he maintains the principles of justice, exer- 
cises mercy by acts of self denial which the law 
does not require, commends himself both to the 
conscience and the affections of moral beings, and 
begets in all right minds not only a sense of re- 
spect and benevolence, but at the same time a sense 
of grateful love for the benefactor. 

There are many who seem to have no right sense 
of the principles of justice and mercy as they relate 
to moral government. This state of mind is born 
of ignorance and sin. God is not only the Father, 
especially of those who are ^'born of the Spirit," 
but he is the ruler and judge of men. A father 
may pardon a son for an offense against himself ; 
but if he is a magistrate, and that son commits the 



EECONCILIATION, OR AT-ONE-MENT. 109 



same offense against the public law, lie can not par- 
don him without forfeiting his character as a ruler, 
or impairing the sense of justice in the public mind. 

If the sense of justice is of God and in God, he 
will maintain it in moral government. The best 
men have the strongest sense of justice. 

A proclamation of pardon on repentance would 
render repentance a selfish act, or make it impos- 
sible. 

" God is love," and therefore in governing the 
world he would exercise benevolence ; but benevo- 
lence would be exercised in such a manner as to 
maintain the sense of justice, which is the basis of 
moral government. 

We desire not onl}^ to elucidate this subject, but 
to produce positive conviction in relation to it. 
Instead of reproducing the same thought, allow me 
to refer you to the chapters on law and atonement 
in " God Eevealed in Creation and in Christ," be- 
ginning with the second book, and thence onward 
to the 198th page.^ 

* It was my intentioii, in printing these Letters, to introduce as 
notes, or as an appendix, several quotations from my previous works 
("The PhUosophy of the Plan of Salvation" and -'God Revealed," 
etc.), but the excellent publishers of these works, ^lessrs. G-ould & 
Lincoln, of Boston, were not willing that such large extracts should 
be made from books, the copyright of which is owned by themselves. 

I have no doubt their views of the matter are proper ; hence I 



110 EECONCILIATIOK, OR AT-ONE-MEKT. 

I commend most heartily the whole subject of 
law dmd atonementj in the beginning of the Second 
Book, to your attention (I have marked the em- 
phatic passages in the volume expressed to you). 
Please read them with the conviction in mind^ that 
in order to maintain the principle of justice in the 
minds of intelligent beings, God must develop and 
maintain this principle in his own moral govern- 
ment. And in connection with this, keep in mind 
that benevolence, which is above law, can be prop- 
erly exercised only to bring back transgressors to 
obedience to law. As law is the only foundation 
of order in the moral universe, and of safety and 
happiness to the creature, benevolence can be ex- 
ercised in no way that is congruous with the sys- 
tem, except in the pardon and restoration of offenders. 

Notice, with me, an outline of the principles 
upon which this conclusion is predicated. 

The universe, physical and moral, is founded in 

have quoted but little of the passages to which I had referred my 
respondent. In one or two cases in which the thought is necessary 
to the completeness of my argument, I have reproduced my own 
thought in other forms. To this I think there can be no objection, 
as those able writers, Bev. Dr. Hopkins, in his Lowell Lectures, and 
Dr. Berg, in his Discussion with Barker, have reproduced, in their 
own words, some of the most valuable thought in my first volume. 
It is perhaps due to myself to say that my volume was published 
some time before tlie appearance of those works. 



RECONCILIATION, OK AT-ONE-MENT. Ill 

law and govern ed by law. In obedience to law 
there is safety and happiness. "Whatever trans- 
gresses law has taken the first step in the road to 
ruin. Law knows, and can know, no pardon. As 
life in any case is impossible without obedience to 
law, pardon while the transgressor is not restored 
would be a nullity and an absurdity. 

Whatever departs from law secures derangement 
in the beoinnino; and death in the end: and in addi- 
tion to its own aberration, produces derangement in 
other things. If an orb were to leave its sphere, 
it would not only rush to destruction, but it would 
cross other orbits, and dash itself against other 
bodies. In such an event the system would be de- 
stroyed unless the deranged body could be drawn 
back before the final destruction, and at the same 
time a re-adjustment be made of the derangement 
which it had caused in the system. When any 
thing departs from the rule of law, it has no power • 
to recover itself or to rectify the error. In the 
physical universe the slightest departure would un- 
balance the attractive forces, and the tendency 
would be to swifter departure. The very laws 
which preserve from destruction every thing in 
obedience to them, hastens and compels the destruc- 
tion of whatever departs from obedience. 



112 RECONCILIATIONj OR AT-OXE-MENT. 

So in the moral Tvorld ; one sin tends to produce 
another. Sin weakens the moral forces which hold 
the soul to obedience. Like all other derange- 
ments, the tendency to sin augments itself by its 
own activity ; hence, in the moral world, as in the 
physical, the import of the sentence is^ the soul 
that sinneth it shall die." 

Moral transgression, likewise, not only puts the 
soul in the road to ruin, but it deranges other moral 
agents. One sinner causes sin in others. Sin be- 
gets sin. As the leprosy, which symbolized its in- 
fluence in the camp of Israel, sin is contagious. It 
ruins one while it infects others. 

Law, then, is a necessity of things, and penalty 
is a necessity of law." Law is inexorable. Every 
transgression tends to the destruction of the subject; 
while the subject, by the transgression, is put with- 
out the pale of safety, and rendered incapable, in 
himself, of returning or of compensating for his 
transgression. 

This inviolability of moral law finds a sanction in 
the reason and conscience of men. The moral law 
is an expression of the will of God. He could not, 
therefore, permit sin without permitting a violation 
of his own will, which would be absurd. Beside, 
if God is holy he ought not to make a law which 



RECONCILIATIONS-, OR AT-OXE-:^EXT. 113 



-would permit sin. Xo man v^'ill say that God 
ought to make a law that would allow a single 
transgression. Xow, if the reason and conscience 
that God has given men say, and sanction the say- 
ing, that God ought not to permit sin, who dare re- 
bel against his moral nature, and say that he has 
done so ? Eeason affirms^ conscience sanctions, and 
the moral law reveals the same penalty that is 
written against the transgressor of every other 
law of the universe — The transgressing suhject shall 
die. 

Now, then, man is a sinner. In gospel-enlight- 
ened lands, he has not lived up to his knowledge 
of good ; nor up to the demands of conscience ; 
nor up to the amount of his ability. He is a trans- 
gressor of the moral law of God, and the penalty of 
that law — dying thou shalt die" — is against him. 
His moral nature is deranged, and tending to the 
second death. 

How, now, shall man be restored and pardoned ? 
How shall the evil jDrojDension be regenerated, and 
the e\al he has occasioned in others be balanced 
and compensated for? Is there any method by 
which, without impairing the sense of justice, be- 
nevolence, which is above law, may restore the trans- 
gressor to obedience, and arrest the evils which his 



114 KECONCILIATION, OE AT-ONE-MENT. 



sin has occasioned in other minds? This is the 
problem of the atonement. Let ns see. 

There are, in the physical nniverse and in phys- 
ical and instinctive law, compensations which are 
placed over against each other ; and thus the in- 
equalities of the various systems of law are met and 
balanced. These compensations or adjustments are 
made by the Creator ; and they become at once the 
evidences of his wisdom and goodness. 

Are there likewise deviations and compensations 
in the moral universe ? We can answer only for 
ourselves, as moral beings, and as we are related to 
the moral law. 

1. The moral law, which requires supreme love 
to God and impartial love to man, is the rule of 
reason and righteousness ; and being the will of 
God, it is the obligatory law for all intelligent and 
moral beings. From this statement I presume 
there will be no dissent. Certainly none by your- 
self. 

2. IvTow, accepting the law as the rule of life, it 
is admitted that man falls below its requirements — 
that, judged by the law, he is condemned as a trans- 
gressor. He is guilty in view of his own con- 
science, knowledge, and ability. He is likewise 
guilty in nature (or, if you prefer it, in character). 



KECONCILIATION, OR AT-OISTE -MEI^-T. 115 

not having the disposition to fulfill his duties ac- 
cording to the example of Christ. The penalties of 
the law are therefore against him, and he can nei- 
ther pardon himself nor beget that love in himself 
which is the fulfilling of the law. 

3. The law, then, is the rule of life. Man is be- 
low its requirements, and therefore liable to de- 
struction as the penalty of transgression. He is 
without love to God — dead already, and tending to 
the second death." Now, is there any compensa- 
tion in the moral universe for this aberration of 
man from the sphere of law ? Is there a recupera- 
tive principle in the moral as there is in the phys- 
ical system of things ? — a redeeming power adapted 
to the nature of the case ? 

The thing required in order to moral compensa- 
tion is that some heing^ united in the same system with 
man, should possess a moral worth rising above law in 
the same degree that man falls below it. Now, we 
postulate that Jesus Christ, by his sacrifice, meets 
this condition in the equation. The law can not 
demand the sacrifice of the innocent for the guilty. 
Its requirement can rise no higher than perfect 
obedience. The death of Christ, therefore, was 
above law ; and if it tended to honor the law by 
restoring transgressors to obedience, it accomplished 



116 EECONCILIATION; OE AT-ONE-MEOT. 

on one side an actual balance against wtat was de- 
ficient on tlie other side. 

The question, then, of vital interest is, does the 
super-merit of Christy which is ahove law^ practically 
counterworh the demerit of man^ which is below law ? 
Now, we afiirm that this result is actually and 
practically accomplished in every one that believes 
in the divine sacrifice of the Eedeemer. 

Love is the fulfilling of the law." Christ's sac- 
rifice was a love-sacrifice — a sacrifice produced by 
divine love. The law required obedience, but 
could not produce it. It required love, but could 
not beget love. The sacrifice of Christ is a reveal- 
ment of divine love, and hence — as every thing 
begets its kind — by the love of God manifest in 
Christ, love for God in Christ is begotten in be- 
lievers. Now, ^' if men love God, they wdll keep 
his commandments." Hence the disposition to 
obedience is restored in the soul of every one who 
believes in Christ. Thus the current of death 
which originated in Adam is met and counteracted 
by the life-cnvTent which originated in Christ. One 
was made a living soul," that is, an earthly being 
— the other is a ^' quickening," that is, life-giving 
Spirit, 

Now, you know, that faith in Christ disposes men 



RECOXCILIATIOX, OR AT-ONE-MENT. 117 

to love and obey liim. You know more than this. 
You know that in the case of your own relatives, 
it produces peaceful obedience in the soul — it casts 
out sin — it works by love, and purifies the heart. 

"What then, is the thing which constitutes the 
merit and power of the divine sacrifice ? We an- 
swer, its mmt is in its love^ luhicli is above law. Its 
personal suffering endured for others. This fact 
likewise constitutes its power. I can not love with 
the love of gratitude one who does no more for me 
than the law requires him to do. But when love 
transcends law, and one rescues me by a sacrifice 
of himself, a sacrifice which love prompted, but 
which law did not require, then my heart, and the 
heart of every believer responds by grateful love 
to the Redeemer. Thus faith works by love," 
and love works by obedience. 

The merit, then, is found in the sacrifice of 
Christ, which, as an expression of divine love, re- 
stores the transgressor and procures pardon by 
balancing his demerit in the sight of the law. By 
this merit the sinner can be pardoned, while by its 
poicer he is redeemed from sin, and restored to 
obedience. 

Thus law and love are the complement of each 
other in the divine government ; and Christ came 



118 EECOI^CILIATIOlSr, OK AT-OISTE-MENT. 

in our humanity 'Ho give himself a ransom for 
many, that whosoever believeth might not perish 
but have eternal life." 

Yours, for a life-giving faith. 



LETTER VIIL 



ON FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 

My Dear Sir : — 

You have not, I presume, any distinct im- 
pression of the views of Mr. Parker on the subject 
of future retribution. He frequently refers to the 
subject, but does not often announce his own opin- 
ions. There are passages, however, in which he 
speaks distinctly. Such an one occurs on page 
438 : The woes of sin are its antidote. Suffering 
comes from wrong-doing, as well-being from virtue. 
If there be suffering in the next world, it is, as in 
this, but the medicine of the sickly soul." 

This is plain. Mr. Parker adopts the opinions 
of those who are called TJniversalists on the subject 
of future retribution. He is wiser than those gen- 
erally are who think with him. He affirms with- 
out argument. Others argue, and in their argument 
reason sees the fallacy. 

We can not but doubt of the sincerity of men 
who profess to find their religion in the Bible, and 



120 ON FUTURE RETBIBUTION-. 

yet tell us they believe in no future punisliment. 
The Bible can not be inte-rpreted to favor such 
views except by subterfuge and perversion on the 
part of the interpreter. Mr. Parker, therefore, sel- 
dom refers to the Bible on this subject. There is 
at least frankness in the audacity of the skeptic 
who sets his own reason above the reason of the 
Bible, and rejects or modifies it when it does not 
accord with his own conceptions. But to assume 
that the Bible is in agreement with the doctrine of 
no future punishment, is a suhilety thsit '^perverts 
the right ways of the Lord," and indicates dishon- 
esty in the interpreter. 

We shall give the more attention to this subject, 
because it is one of vital interest to all persons who 
enjoy the light of the gospel. It has to do with 
the motives which deter men from sin. We do 
not say that Christians act in view of future retri- 
bution. Love deters the Christian from sin. For 
them there is no evil in the future. But for the 
unthankful and disobedient — for those who abuse 
the divine mercy and harden themselves in selfish- 
ness — there is evil in the future ; and repentance 
with such is impossible so long as they believe 
there is no future punishment. Convince an im- 
penitent man that sin will not exclude him from 



ox FUTUEE EETEIBUTIOX. 



121 



fature happiness — that all the evil he \rill expe- 
rience is present inconvenience or comr unction of 
conscience — and with such convictionSj repentance 
toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ are 
out of the question. Every wicked man is willing 
to take the sin with its present evil ; and as for the 
figment, that the consequences of sin will cure sin, 
or remove the cause of sinning, it is, as we shall 
see further on, contrary to both reason and the 
Scriptures. 

' An absurd argument is destroyed so soon as its 
absurdity is made apparent. The Universalist view 
of the future state, which Mr. Parker adopts, can 
be shown to be absurd both by reason and Scrip- 
ture. We shall endeavor to make this apparent, 
and to reach,' by our conclusion, the evil not only 
as it is maintained by Mr. Parker, but as it prevails 
in a wider sense. 

You will notice that in this and succeeding chap- 
ters, and indeed in all I have written on this sub- 
ject, I use the Scripture phrases, without discussing 
the questions at issue between denominations, in 
relation to what icill he the character of future punish^ 
merd — I make no effort to determine the mode of 
punishment, whether it be to sin and suffer forever, 

or whether the " second death" be the death of the 

6 



122 



ON FUTURE EETRIBUTION. 



soul. Archbishop "Whately and others have dis- 
cussed those points. We argne only the question 
at issue with Mr. Parker and those who, like him, 
believe in no future punishment; or^ if there be 
any, that it is only disciplinary. We do not wish 
to occupy space with any other issue than the main 
one. The main question is not whether God will 
destroy the soul and body of the wicked in hell ?" 
or whether he will permit them to live sinning and 
suffering forever. The negative of the position 
that all men will he saved^ is, that all men will NOT 
he saved. We believe this point is plain, whether 
we view it in the light of reason or of revelation. 
The other question concerning eternal sin and suf- 
fering, or the destruction of those unfitted for 
heaven, admits of discussion, and whichever way it 
may be settled by any one, the vital doctrines of 
the Scripture remain intact. In either case, the 
finally impenitent never enter the kingdom of the 
blessed. 

My own opinion is, that while many expressions 
of the New Testament favor the doctrine that those 
unfitted for heaven will suffer the *^ second death" 
by the '^destruction of both soul and body in 
hell," yet the specific expression of the Saviour in 
the 25th chapter of Matthew requires a different in- 



ON FUTUEE EETEIBUTION. 123 

terpretation. I do not now see how any fair exe- 
gesis will giye any otter sense to this passage than 
the one which the great body of evangelical Chris- 
tians have received, namely, that those who have 
rejected Christ and disobeyed his commands, will 
be doomed to everlasting punishment," while the 
righteous will inherit "life eternal." The difficulty 
of construing this passage in accordance with the 
opinion that the " destruction of ungodly men" is 
the destruction of the soul, is given with distinct- 
ness and discrimination by Professor Post, in a 
recent article in the New-Englander,^ We have 
extracted that part of this article which relates to 
the passage referred to. 

In all discussions relating to this subject we use 
Scripture phrases. We shall prove that those who 
die unregenerated will " never see life." Whether 
they will be annihilated after the judgment, or sin 
and suffer forever, we leave for Mr. Parker and 
the Universalists to determine. 

We are aware that the intensity and eternity of 
future misery have sometimes been urged with a 
spirit which indicated any thing else in the polemic 
beside a sense of the justice of God. Advantage 
has been taken of this by bad minds to create preju- 
* See Appendix. 



124 ON FUTUKE RETRIBUTION. 



dice against evangelical piety, and to destroy in 
the minds of tliose who disobey the gospel the 
salutary impression that without repentance they 
will be reserved unto the day of judgment to be 
punished." 

Let us leave, then, whatever may be doubtful or 
difl&cult concerning the mere form of the doctrine 
of future punishment, and consider the main ques- 
tion. We afl&rm that neither Scripture nor reason 
teach the future salvation of those who die im- 
penitent ; but that they will perish" in the "sec- 
ond death" — whatever that second death may be. 

Notice, first, the absurdity of any effort which 
seeks to derive the doctrine of no future punish- 
ment from the Scriptures. By willful perversion, 
Universalism might be tortured out of Bunyan, or 
Baxter, or Edwards, much more readily than it can 
be out of the Bible. By the same artifice univer- 
sal damnation may be proved — the one as readily 
as the other. Let us see. 

Universal salvation proved hy per- Universal damnation proved ly 
verting the Scriptv/res. perverting the Scriptures. 

1st John, i. 9. God is faithful Joshua, xxiv. 19. He is a holy 

and just to forgive us our sins : God, he is a jealous God, he will 

and to cleanse us from all un- not forgive your transgressions 

righteousness. nor your sins. 



ON FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 



125 



Universal salvation proved ly 
perverting the Scriptiures. 

LaiTL iii. 31. For the Lord will 
not cast 03" forever. 



AU will be saved, because the 
Scriptures say — Mai. ii. 10, Have 
we not aU one father ? Hath not 
one God created us ?" 



The world will be saved, be- 
cause the Bible says, Christ gives 
eternal life to as many as the 
Father hath given him; and in 
another place it says, the Father 
bath put aU things into his hands 
— so tbat the proof is clear that 
all will be saved in Christ. 

AU men will be saved, because 
the Bible teaches that Christ wiU 
reconcile aU things unto himself 
— Col. i. 20 — and says in another 
place that we " see not now all 
things reconciled," implying that 
aU will be reconciled hereafter. 
Here is universal reconciliation 
and salvation plainly proved. 



Universal damnation proved "by 
perverting the Scriptures. 

1st Chron. xviii. 9. If thou 
seek him he wiU be found of 
thee ; but if thou forsake him he 
will cast thee off forever. 

All will be danrmed, because 
the Scriptures say — Isaiah, xxvil 
11, He that made them will not 
have mercy on them ; and he that 
formed them wUl show them no 
favor. 

The world wiU be damned, be- 
cause the Bible says — They who 
have not the spirit of Christ are 
none of his ; and in another place 
it saj's positively, the world can 
not receive the spirit of Christ — 
therefore it follows that the whole 
world must inevitably be damned. 

All men wUl be damned, be- 
cause the Bible teaches, Jude 15, 
that the Lord cometh with ten 
thousand of his saints to execute 
judgment upon all (Travrov all 
things) ; and if we do not see 
judgment executed upon all now, 
yet the passage says, the Lord 
cometh, or wiU come, to execute 
judgment " on aU things here- 
after. 



The words "forever," ^^everlasting," forever 
and ever," occur frequently in the Scriptures, some- 
times in connection with temporal, sometimes with 
spiritual subjects. An attempt has always been 



126 ON FUTURE RETEIBUTIOlSr. 



made by those who hold the yiews of Mr. Parker, 
to strip these words of their usual import, which is 
that of endless duration. Sometimes, as all know, 
they are applied to temporal things^ when the com- 
mon sense of the reader, as in all other similar 
cases, will limit them by the nature of the subject. 
" The everlasting hills" will stand while time lasts ; 
God and the soul live when time dies. When these 
words are limited in signification, the limitation 
grows out of the nature of the subject. To this all 
agree ; and this is all that is necessary to show the 
absurdity of the effort to destroy their import in 
connection with the future destiny of the wicked. 

APPLIED TO EXPRESS 
THE DURATION OF THE 

Hojppiness of the Righteous, Misery of the Wicked, 

Matth, xix. 29. Those that 2 Thess. i. 8, 9. The Lord 
leave all to follow Christ shall Jesus shall be revealed from 
"receive an hundred-fold, and heaven, in flaming fire, takuig 
shall inherit everlasting life." vengeance on them that know 

not God, and obey not the gos- 
pel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who 
shall be punished with everlast- 
ma destruction from the presence 
of the Lord and the glory of his 
power. 

Luke, xviii. 30. They " shaU Matth. xxv. 41. Depart from 
receive manifold more in this me, ye cursed, into evej-lasting fire, 
present time, and in the world to prepared for the devil and his 
come, lifo everlasting^ angels. 



ox FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 127 



Happiness of the Righteous. Misery of the Wielded. 

Romans, VL 22. But now be- Matth. xviii. 8. If thy hand or 

ing made free from sui and be- thy foot offend thee, cut them off 

come servants of God, ve have and cast them from thee ; it is 

TOUT fruit imto hohness, and the better for thee to enter into hfe 

EXD, everlasting life. halt or maimed, rather than hav- 
ing two hands or two feet to be 
cast into EVEELASTixayzre. 

Dan. xii. 2. Many of them Dan. xii. 2. Many of them 

which sleep in the dust of the which sleep in the dust of the 

earth shall awake, some to ever- earth shaU awake, some to ever- 

LAsm'G Zz/e, and some to shame lasting life, and some to shame 

and everlasting contempt. and EVERLASTiN'a contempt. 

Matth. XXV. 46. These shall Matth. xxv. 46. These shall 

go away into everlasting punish- go away into everlastixGt pun- 

ment, but the righteous into life ishment^ but the righteous into 

EYEELASTIXG. life everlasting. 

THE PHRASE ^' FOREVER AND EYER" AS APPLIED 
TO EXPRESS THE DURATION OF THE 



Happiness of the Bighteoics. 

Dan. xii. 3. They that turn 
many to righteousness shall shine 
as stars forever and ever. 

Rev. xxil 5. The Lord G-od 
giveth them hght, and they shall 
reign forever and ever. 



Misery of the WicJced. 

Rev. xiv. 11. The smoke of 
their torment ascendeth up for- 
ever and ever, and they have no 
rest day nor night. 

Rev. XX. 10. The devil, the 
beast, and the false prophet shall 
be tormented day and night for- 
ever and ever. 



Mark, now. TV"e do not argue from these tables 
tliat either the existence of punishment or of hap- 
piness is eternal. This is as clearly reyealed as any 
words in the Hebrew or Greek language can reveal 



128 Ols FUTURE RETEIBUTION. 

it ; but ttis is not our argument. Our proposition 
is, that the destruction of the wicked will be as en- 
during as the happiness of the righteous, because 
both are supported by precisely the same proof. If 
Mr. Parker and his friends afl&rm that these words 
never mean eternal duration, then they get rid of 
everlasting punishment ; but they likewise get rid 
of the everlasting God^ and of the everlasting life 
of the righteous. 

If they say that they sometimes mean eternal du- 
ration, and sometimes limited duration — that the 
duration is to be inferred from the nature of the 
subject to which they are applied ; then the subject 
to which they are applied is the same in both cases, 
man — or the soul of man, or the body of man. 
"Whatever they may choose to call the subject, there 
is no doubt but that it is the same in both cases. 

If they reject both of these, and argue that the 
words ^' everlasting," and eternal," and forever," 
do not apply to the soul, but to the punishm-cnt or 
misery of the soul or body ; then, on the other hand, 
the words do not apply to the soul of the righteous, 
but to the happiness or joy of the soul or body, 
and if misery is not eternal in its nature, then joy 
or happiness is not eternal in its nature. 

Now, whatever these words mean in one case, 



ox FUTUEE EETRIBUTION. 129 

they mean the same in the other. One thing, 
therefore, is manifest, namely^ that the 'kleath" of 
the wicked will endure as long as the ''life" of the 
righteous. This truth is more obvious than it is in 
the proposition, six and half a dozen are equal; 
for in the one case the number is expressed in dif- 
ferent language, in the other the same duration is 
expressed in the same language. 

If the Universalist can succeed in proving that 
the punishment of the wicked will end ; he has at 
the same time proved that the happiness of the 
righteous will end ; because precisely the same 
words and phrases used to express the one are used 
to express the other. Thus the dilemma is perfect, 
and one from which there is no possible escape — 
that so fast and so far as Mr. Parker is able to de- 
stroy, in the minds of the wicked, the fear of ever- 
lasting punishment^ he destroys at the same time, in 
the minds of all that believe him, the hope of ever- 
lasting happiness ; becau.se the proof which sustains 
the one is the same that sustains the other ; so that 
if one fails, both fail — if one stands, both stand — 
and the duration of the one must remain the same 
as the duration of the other. Thus, like blind 
Samson in the temple of the uncircumcised Philis- 
tines, if Mr. Parker could succeed in subverting the 

6* 



180 ON FUTURE RETRIBUTION". 

pillars of the temple of truth, the wreck would fall 
upon his own head. 

There are but two ways by which it is possible 
to express truth in language. The same truth may 
be asserted affirmatively and negativelyj and when 
a proposition is proved affirmatively and nega- 
tively, it is not possible to make it either stronger 
or plainer. 

Now, the everlasting punishment" of the im- 
penitent is not only, as proved above, repeatedly 
affirmed in the word of God ; but it is likewise as- 
serted in a negative fcfrm, a form by which the 
existence of God and the happiness of the righteous 
are also expressed. In relation to God it is written, 
Thy dominion shall not pass away." In relation 
to the righteous, they shall receive "a crown of 
glory that fadeth not away." In relation to the 
wicked, consider the following : 

He that helieveth not the Son shall not see life^ 
but the wrath of God abideth on him." 

The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall 
not be forgiven unto men, neither in this world, nei- 
ther in the world to comey 

In hell he lifted up his eyes, heing in torment^ 
" Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, 
so that those who would pass from hence to you 



ox FUTURE RETRIBrTIO:^^. 



131 



can notj neither can tliej pass to us tvIio Tvoiild come 
from thence.*' 

Their worm clieth notj and their fire is not 
quencJiedJ' 

Without holiness no man shall see the Lord." 

''For if ye believe not that I am he ye shall die 
in your sins J'' 

Tlie truth in relation to this topic is, that the same 
Tvords which are applied in the Bible to teach the 
eternity of God and the eternity of happiness, are 
applied to teach the eternity of that '' destriiction" 
which shall come n|)on the wicked. They are the 
strongest words and phrases which can be used in 
any language ; and all competent interpreters agree 
that their first import is eternal. And in addition 
to this^ the same truth is taught not only affirm- 
atively but negatively ; so that the everlasting pun- 
ishment of the wicked is proved in the strongest 
way, and in all the ways that human language can 
prove any truth. 

The Universalists adopt a similar method of 
interpretation in order to escape the force of the 
figurative language used in the Xew Testament. 
Because the figures which relate to future punish- 
ment had a local and temporal origin, they infer 
that they have only a local and temporal import. 



132 OK FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 

The word translated hell they find originally refer- 
red to the valley of the sons of Hinnom; near Jeru- 
salem ; hence they confine the figure to its fact; 
and thus destroy the end for which figures were 
made, Mr. Parker has not told us whether he 
adopts the reasoning of those who believe with him 
in this matter, but as he c^dopts their conclusions, 
it is fair to infer he adopts their reasons. Now, if 
the force of figures is to be destroyed on one side 
of the argument, it should be on the other; then, 
supposing this reasoniog to be true, there is neither 
a heaven nor a hell. The word heaven is derived 
from a word which in its original import signified 
the atmosphere or the firmament ; and the import 
of the word paradise is a garden. In both cases the 
words which signify heaven and hell are educed 
from things temporal and local in their nature. If 
one must be divested of its meaning, which signifies 
a state of future punishment, then the other must 
be divested of its import, which signifies a state of 
future happiness. We should then, according to 
this method . of interpretation, have neither a hell 
nor a heaven. 

This interpretation strikes at the foundation of 
revelation. It would be impossible, if such perver- 
sions were permitted, for any revelation ever to be 



ox FUTUEE EETHIBUTIOIST. 



133 



made to man. Man can learn the unknown only 
by figures and parables drawn from tlie known. 

For what of God above or man below ? 

What can we reason but 'from what we know ?" 

No terms are used in the Bible to teach, us the 
existence of a future world, or the condition of the 
soul in that world, which are not derived in some 
way from things that pertain to the present state 
of existence. The Saviour always spake in par- 
ables and figures (Matt. xiii. 34), because he had 
to illustrate the unknown by what was known to 
his hearers. The individual, therefore, who en- 
deavors to destroy in the minds of his hearers the 
application of these figures to another life, destroys, 
so far as he succeeds, the very effect which Christ 
designed to accomplish by using them. This 
method of interpretation proves there is no hell, 
but it proves likewise that there is no devil, no 
angel, no heaven, no God ! 

The general tenor of the New Testament — the 
general acceptation of the words and phrases used 
by Christ and his apostles, as well as the effects 
produced by their ministry, render it certain that 
they taught men that eternal life depended on rec- 
onciliation to God as he is manifested in Jesus Christ. 



134 



OlSr FUTURE RETRIBUTIOlSr. 



Notice the evidence of this in the following pas- 
sages. 

The points of the following passages are directly 
against Parkerism. Fear not them which kill the 
body, but are not able to kill the soul, but rather 
fear him which is able to destroy both soul and 
body in hell." 

John V. 25-29. ^'Marvel not at this, for the hour 
is coming in the which all that are in their graves 
shall hear his voice ; and shall come forth, they 
that have done good unto the resurrection of life ; 
and they that have done evil unto the resurrection 
of damnation. 

The judgment is, by the sacred writers, put in 
order after death, and the resurrection of the dead. 

Heb. vi. 2. The doctrine of baptisms, and of 
the laying on of hands, and of the resurrection of 
the dead, and of eternal judgment^ 

Heb. ix. 27. And as it is appointed unto men 
once to die, hut after this the judgment ; so Christ was 
once offered (or died once), and unto them which 
looJc for him, shall he appear the second time, with- 
out sin unto salvation." 

2 Tim. iv. 7, 8. "I have fought a good fight, I 
have finished my course, I have kept the faith ; 
henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of right- 



ON FUTUKE RETRIBUTION. 



135 



eonsness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will 
give me at that day ; and not to me only, hut unto 
all them also that love Ms appearing.'''' Was this 
righteous judgment when Paul would be crowned 
with all that loved Christ's appearing," or all 
them that looked for him" to be at the destruction 
of J erusalem ? Or was it then taking place ? Ei- 
ther idea is an absurdity. 

2 Tim. iv. 1. ^' I charge thee, therefore, before 
God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge 
the quick [living] and the dead, at his appearing 
and his kingdom." 

2 Pet. ii. 7. But the heavens and the earth 
which are now, by the same word are kept in store, 
reserved unto fire, against the day of judgment and 
perdition of ungodly men." 

By looking at the preceding verses it will be seen 
that Peter is speaking of the physical earth, afl&rming 
its destruction or dissolution once by water, and its 
final change or dissolution by fire ; at which time will 
be the day of judgment and the perdition of un- 
godly men." Observe, he says the present earth 
is kept in store^ reserved unto fire against the day 
of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." How 
could language make the truth plainer, that the day 
of judgment and perdition of ungodly men will be 



136 ON FUTUEE RETEIBUTIOjN". 

at the time when this earth shall be changed by 
fire ? 

2 Peter, ii. 4, 9. ' " The Lord knoweth how to de- 
liver the . godly out of temptation, and to reserve 
the unjust unto the DAY OF JUDaMENT, to be pun- 
ished." 

Are the unjust rewarded and punished as they 
go along, and reserved beside unto (not a day, nor 
this day, nor all days, but) the day of judgment^ to 
be punished ? 

Matth. xii. 32. Whosoever speaketh a word 
against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him. 
But whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it 
shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor 
in the world to come." 

John, iii. 16. For God so loved the world that 
he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever be- 
lieveth in him should not perish, but have everlast- 
ing life." If this does not imply that whosoever 
does not believe in him shall perish and not have 
everlasting life^ then there is no meaning in lan- 
guage. 

John, vi. 54. " Whosoever eateth my flesh and 
drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I will 
raise him up at the last day." What does this im- 
ply, if Christ did not deceive his disciples ? 



ox FUTUEE EETEIBUTIOIT. 



137 



Acts, xxiy. 25. ^' And as Paul reasoned of 
righteousness, temperance, and jadgment to come, 
Felix trembled." Was it a judgment that had 
already come, or the destruction of Jerusalem, that 
made a Roman governor tremble ? 

1 Peter, iv. 18. And if the righteous scarcely be 
saved, "where shall the ungodly and the sinner ap- 
pear ?" Easily answered, says Mr. Parker. They 
will appear in heaven, with the righteous who are 
scarcely saved. 

Matt. xxvi. 24. ^' It had been good for that man 
he had not been born." How could this be, if 
Judas went to heaven at death? If the doctrine 
that Mr. Parker preaches be true, Judas got to 
heaven before Jesus. 

* He Trith a cord outwent his Lord, 
And got to heaven first." 

Luke, X. 42. But one thing is needful, and 
Mary hath chosen that good part that shall never 
he taken aiuay from herP Will those who do not 
choose it have the good part and the one thing 
needful, which shall never be taken away from 
them ? 

James, i. 15. " Then when lust hath conceived, 
it bringeth forth sin : and sin, when it is finished, 



138 ON FUTUBE EETRIBUTION. 

bringetli fortli deathP Mr. Parker and tlie TJniver- 
saliste say that when sin is finished it bringeth 
forth life. Which is right ? 

John, viii. 51. Yerily, verily, I say unto you 
(mark it) if a man keep my sayings he shall never 
see death." Does this mean the first or the second 
death — death of the body or of the soul ? 

It is not doubted by any well-informed person 
that Christ and his apostles used the words and 
phrases which those who heard them — ^those to whom 
they wrote, would understand as teaching the fu- 
ture punishment of the wicked. They either taught 
what they believed on this subject, or they willfully 
deceived the people. They not only used the 
words which the Jews used to designate future 
punishment, but they were even careful that the 
Gentiles should not mistake their meaning. Hence 
Paul speaks of ^- blackness of darkness," and Peter 
uses the word Tartarus" to convey the same idea. 

The whole form and pressure of the apostolic 
teaching represent themselves and those who heard 
them as acting under a deep sense of responsibility 
in regard to the future. " We must all stand before 
the judgment-seat of Christ." ^'Knowing the ter- 
rors of the Lord, we persuade men." They warned 
every man night and day with tears." 



ox FUTURE RETKIBUTIOX. 189 

Some who lieard tlieDi "trembled;" others cried 
out " Men and brethren, what shall we do And 
all believers took up their cross daily and followed 
Christ — all of them to persecution^ and many of 
them to the flames. 

Now. in conclusion of this long letter, I do not 
know that a vindication of the Scriptures is neces- 
sary in J our case, and with Mr. Parker it would 
have little influence. But there are others that it 
may save from a leap into the darkness of skepti- 
cism ; and we offer the vindication as a basis of 
the rational exposition which will ensue. 



LETTER IX. 



RATIONAL EXPOSITION OF PROBATION AND EETRI- 
BUTION. 

My Dear Sir: — 

The reasonings of those who reject the au- 
thority of Scripture while they teach the salvation 
of all men, are usually predicated upon what they 
assume to be the attributes of God and the paren- 
tal character of God. Their proposition is as fol- 
lows : ^' God is love." He is infinitely wise, infinitely 
good, and infinitely powerful. He must, therefore, 
have designed from the beginning the greatest good 
of all his creatures, and as he has power to execute 
the designs which his love prompts and his wisdom 
devises, therefore (they infer) the whole family of 
man will be saved. 

In one sense this proposition is true ; but they 
give it a false sense, and draw from it a false infer- 
ence. The first fallacy is in the method of their 
reasoning, which must of necessity produce false 
results. They start with the d ^priori method, by 



PROBATION ASD RETEIBUTIOX. 141 



forming in their own minds a conception of wliat 
tbev clioose to imagine the nature and attributes of 
God ought to be, and then infer results from their 
own suppositions. Now, every one that knows any 
thing about the subject knows that the d posterioi^i 
method, or reasoning from effects to their causes — 
i. e., induction from the works of God and the "Word 
of God — is the only method by which we can rea- 
son with any certainty concerning what the love of 
God is, or what acts that love would prompt him 
to accomplish. One man may assume that God is 
love, and another that he is a God of vengeance ; 
and the reasoning of both concerning what love is, 
and what vengeance is, will be mere idle or wicked 
imaginations from beginning to end, unless they 
define what these words mean when applied to 
God, by referring to what God does in nature and 
providence, and what he says in revelation. Na- 
ture and revelation both proceed from God, and 
must, when rightly interpreted, bear true and har- 
monious testimony to his nature and attributes. 
The character of the First, or of any cause, not 
cognizable by the senses, can be known only by 
the effects which it produces. Yain talkers, by 
forming in their own minds a character for God, 
and determining, d priori^ what kind of religion 



142 PROBATION AND EETRIBUTIOK. 

God ought to give, and then forcing nature and 
the Bible to coincide with their speculations, has 
given rise to more injurious heresies than all other 
causes combined. 

A false method must necessarily lead to a false 
conclusion. By this method an individual would 
reason as follows : God is infinitely good and infi- 
nitely powerful. As he is infinitely good, he would 
not desire to create his creatures subject to any evil 
whatever ; and as he is infinitely powerful, he can 
accomplish all his purposes, therefore all his crea- 
tures will be free from all evil, and perfectly happy 
during their whole existence. But this speculation 
would lead him into direct falsehood. His reason- 
ings from the supposed character of God would be 
contradicted both by nature and revelation. And 
as God is forever the same, the same method of 
reasoning will forever lead to falsehood as its result. 

Let us, by a better logic^ endeavor to reach a 
result more in accordance with experience and the 
Bible. The Scriptures affirm that God is love," 
and as the results which skeptics deduce from their 
own assumptions on this subject are contradicted 
both by natural and revealed truth, the vital ques- 
tions arise, What is the love of God ? and, In what 
manner is the love of God manifested? The Scrip- 



PROBATIO^^ AS J) RETRIBUTION. 143 



tares teacTi " God is love," Oar God is a consum- 
ing fire," His name is holy." The living crea- 
tures before the throne," full of eyes within, denoting 
profound and pervading intelligence, cry continu- 
ally. Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Al- 
mighty." Holiness is applied to God more em- 
phatically, more frequently, and in a greater variety 
of language, than any other word in the Scriptures. 
The love of God, then, is holy love, or love of holi- 
ness. Isow, if holy love is the character of God, 
then his character is directly opposed to sin. It is 
a truism that God must be opposed by nature to 
whatever is opposed to his nat^ire. It belongs to 
the nature of things, that just in proportion as any 
being loves one thing, he is opposed to that Avhich 
is its opposite. Hence it follows that God can not 
love holiness without hating sin, just in proportion 
to his love of holiness. The principle is so obvious 
that every sane mind will assent to it. This truth 
is not only matter of principle, but it is matter of 
fact. We know the more holy — the more like God 
a Christian becomes, the more he hates sin. It is 
likewise matter of necessity^ because sin is the op- 
posite of holiness, and love is the opposite of hatred. 
It is likewise matter of revelation ; Jesus said, If 
a man love the one he will hate the other, ye can 



144 PEOBATION AISTD RETRIBUTION. 



not serve God and mammon." From these premises 
tben, it follows, that the more any being loves holi- 
ness, the more he hates sin ; and the conclusion fol- 
lows incontrovertiblj and eternally, that as God has 
infinite love for holiness, he is infinitely opposed 
to sin. 

If, then, God's nature is holy love, how would 
the love of God be manifested toward the human 
family, who are sinners? The answer is plain in 
two respects — (1) It would be manifested in a man- 
ner consistent with the nature and wants of man ; 
and (2) it would be manifested in a manner adapted 
to turn man from sin to holiness. Man can find 
happiness only in holiness. God is love, and would 
seek man's happiness only by making him holy. 
There is a physical necessity in the one case, and a 
moral necessity in the other. There is, first, the 
necessity of nature. The beaver is so constituted, 
that he finds his happiness in the water; and if he 
were by some means thrown upon the land, no 
benefit could be conferred upon him that would 
make him happy, and answer the ends of his na- 
ture, only that he should be led back to the water. 
His constitution was such, that no other benefit 
would do him permanent good. If a physician 
were called to see a patient who had a cancer on 



PEOBATIOX AND EETEIBUTIOI>r. 145 

his breast, the only thing to be done would be to 
cut it out from the roots. The physician might give 
palliatives, so that the patient would have less pain 
— or he might make his patient believe it was no can- 
cer — or forget that he had a cancer near his vitals ; 
but if the physician were to do this instead of re- 
moving the evil, he would be a wicked man and the 
enemy of his patient. The man's case was such, 
that the only favor which could be conferred upon 
him would be to cut out the cancer. Now all agree 
that sin is the great evil of the soul of man. Noth- 
ing can make man spiritually happy here, or jS.t 
him for happiness hereafter, but the removal of sin 
from his nature. Sin is the plague-spot on the soul 
which destroys its peace, and threatens its destruc- 
tion unless removed. It is therefore certain that if 
the love of God were manifested toward man, it 
would be in turning man from sin, which produces 
misery, to holiness which produces happiness. 

The question that remains is, in what way, con- 
sistently with the nature of man, would the love of 
God be manifested in using means and influences to 
turn men from sin to holiness ? 

All revelation, as well as philosophy and expe- 
rience, teach that man is a sinner ; — but God holy. 

Now, if God is holy and man is a sinner, two things 

7 



146 PROBATIOK AND RETRIBUTION. 

follow of course. First that the will of man differs 
from the will of God ; second, that God desires the 
will of man should be conformed to his will. The 
question then arises, by what method would God's 
goodness be manifested in influencing the will of 
man to accord with his own will as revealed to us 
in reason and the Bible ? The answer to this ques- 
tion is obvious, both from reason and revelation. 

The will of man can be influenced but in two 
ways, viz., by compulsion and by motives. A man 
might be forced to sign a deed, or say his prayers, 
or to obey by external action some commandment ; 
yet his acts would have no moral charax^ter. The 
only way that a man's will can be moved, and he 
continue a moral agent, is by motives. The will 
of man never acts morally except in view of motives. 
It follows, then, that as it is God's desire that man, 
as a free agent, should love and obey him — the evi- 
dence of his goodness is just in proportion to the 
motives which he has presented to turn him from 
evil to good. For it being true that the will of 
man in his present condition may be influenced to 
good or evil by motives — and it being likewise true 
that sin is an evil which destroys the happiness or 
life of the soul — ^then it is obvious that that being 
manifests the, most goodness, who presents the 



PEOBATION AND RETEIBUTION. 147 

strongest motives to man, as a free agent — to deter 
him from sin and influence him to hohness ; and 
that is a wicked being, and the enemy of God and 
man, who destroys the motives which would influ- 
ence men from sin to hohness. 

Further, the soul is so constituted that it can be 
influenced by motives in two waj^s, viz., by address- 
ing its hopes and its fears. Now, if God has so 
constituted the soul, that it can be influenced by 
motives from evil to good in these two ways, it is 
conclusive evidence of his goodness that he has in 
both these ways used means to influence the minds 
of his creatures. And the stronger the motives 
thus presented, the stronger the evidence of the 
goodness of God. Now, from these premises, mark 
the motives which God has set before sinners in 
the Bible. To deter them from sin, God has pre- 
scDted for their consideration the everlasting pun- 
ishment of devils and disobedient sinners ; and to 
influence them to good, he has set before them the 
everlasting blessedness of those who repent, and 
love and obey him. Both of these being motives 
alike designed to influence men from sin to holi- 
ness, the man who denies the existence of a hell, 
denies the evidence of the goodness of God as truly 
as the man who denies the existence of heaven. 



148 PEOBATION AND R E T R I B U T I 0 JST. 

Everlasting punishment and the perdition of un- 
godly men. as the consequence of sin, and involving 
suffering in proportion to their sins, is the greatest 
motive that can be addressed to men to deter them 
from evil ; and everlasting life and happiness the 
greatest that can be presented to induce them to 
good. 

In presenting these motives, Grod has given the 
highest evidence of his goodness and love to his 
creatures ; because he has presented infinite motives 
to induce them to heaven and happiness ; and pre- 
sented them in every way by which they can affect 
the will. On the one side there is the everlasting 
punishment of hell, as the consequence of sin^ and 
on the other the blessedness of heaven, as the con- 
sequence of holiness, through the mercy of Christ ; 
and he that will continue to disobey God, notwith- 
standing these motives, deserves to go to hell, and 
must go there from the necessity of the case, be- 
cause no gTcater motives than everlasting punish- 
ment and everlasting happiness can be presented 
to influence the will of an intelligent free agent; 
and- no greater kindness can be manifested to move 
the heart than the voluntary sacrifice of Jesus for 
man. If the sinner will not repent and love God, 
in view of these, nothing but physical force re- 



PBOBATION AND EETEIBUTION. 149 



mains, and God will never force sinners by phys- 
ical means to heaven and happiness. 

We do not design to say that the fear of pun- 
ishment is a motive which induces Christians to 
obey. ^' The love of God casteth out fear." There 
is no punishment for the children of God, therefore 
they have nothing to fear. It is for those who dis- 
obey and pervert God's truth to fear hell. God has 
told them the consequence of their sin in order 
that they may be arrested in their course of trans- 
gression. Before them in the way to hell stands 
the angel of justice, holding up the holy law, in 
which it is written, Eepent or perish." Behind 
them, in the way to heaven, stands the divine Sa- 
viour, crying, Turn ye^ turn ye — for why will ye 
die A sense of evil and danger arrests the sin- 
ner — love reforms and guides the saint. 

Man is a being of hopes and fears, and God has 
addressed him as such in the Bible ; and it can not 
be doubted that if there were no motives in the 
gospel addressed tCKthe fears of men to turn them 
from evil, that God might have influenced men in 
one way which has not been done. Consequently, by 
denying the existence of everlasting punishment, 
Mr. Parker denies that God has presented infinite 
motives to deter men from sin ; instead, therefore, 



150 PROBATION AND KETRIBUTION. 



of showing the infinite goodness of God, he makes 
a direct attack upon the goodness of Jehovah ; and 
an attack which, so far as snccessful, destroys the 
power of the gospel, by destroying the motives by 
which God would influence men to repentance. 
And this is done notwithstanding that terrible ana- 
thema which God has thundered in the ears of all 
those who pervert his truth — If any man preach 
any other gospel unto you than that ye have re- 
ceived — let him he accursed.^^ 

The existence of future punishment and " ever- 
lasting destruction," is an evidence of the goodness, 
justice, and wisdom of God : of goodness, in that 
it is a motive to prevent sin and turn men from evil ; 
of justice, in that it is the righteous doom of irre- 
claimable sinners ; and of wisdom, in that God 
can thus make the penalty of sin a motive to deter 
from sin. 

And the fact that all these divine means, and 
motives, and influences are used in this world to 
turn men from sin to holiness, teaches us that this 
world is a place of probation — the place where 
God's long-suffering spares men in order that they 
may repent and obe}' the gospel. If in view of 
forbearance and infinite mercy and motives on the 
part of God, they will not be saved, the only alter- 



PROBATION AND RETRIBUTION^. 151 



native is that tliev be permitted to sin and suffer the 
con3eqnence. In the intermediate state they will 
sujffer in proportion to the sinfulness of their charac- 
ter, and when ^' death and hell deliver np their 
dead every one not found written in the Lamb's 
Book of Life will be cast into the lake of fire, which 
is the second death." 

The existence of hell may even be, in one sense, 
an evidence of God's mercy as well as his justice. 
It may be the best thing that can be done for na- 
tures which have confirmed themselves in sin. 
Suppose it had been proposed to Benedict Arnold, 
after his apostasy, to return to the colonies — ask the 
pardon of Washington — confess his wicked duplicity 
and treachery, and on these conditions be restored 
to citizenship. He would have known that such a 
course would promote his happiness, yet without a 
change of principle, he would have rejected it with 
contempt. Suppose further, that when the war 
was finished, and Washington had put down all 
power adverse to the happiness of the colonies, 
Arnold was found among the prisoners, having 
contended as long as he could against the govern- 
ment. His situation was now such, that any con- 
fession that he might make, or any pardon for 
which he might ask, could proceed from no other 



152 PEOBATION AND E E T R I B U T I O 



tLan selfisli motives. When men fall into the bands 
of the living God, or into the hands of the executor 
of the law, repentance and love to the lawgiver is 
then impossible, because the motive determines the 
character of the act, and right motives in acting 
would then be impossible, because they would be 
necessarily selfish. 

Now, then, seeing repentance and love for the 
governor under such circumstances would be im- 
possible, suppose the alternative had been proposed 
to Arnold either to spend his life in the presence 
of Washington, and in the society of those who 
knew him to be a traitor at heart ; or to be banished 
to an island which contained only rebels and crim- 
inals like himself, he would undoubtedly have 
chosen the latter immediately. Because, although 
the island would be a hell on account of the remorse 
of guilty consciences and the rage of evil passions 
that would exist and increase there, yet his nature 
had become so corrupted, that to live under the 
eye of the magnanimous Washington, and amid 
those who abhorred bad principles, would have been 
to his soul severer punishment than to live among 
the guilty and condemned in the island. 

Now, suppose Washington (knowing that his 
apostasy had so corrupted his nature that he would 



PROBATIO^T AND K E T B I B U T I 0 JST. 153 

be less miserable to be banished from bis presence 
than to continue in the society that made patriots 
happy), in view of his past hfe, and in view of the 
character he then possessed, had banished him for- 
ever from his presence, such banishment would 
have been not only an exhibition of justice but of 
mercy, and it would have been the best thing that 
could have been done for the man in view of his 
character and circumstances. So with God. Ban- 
ishment to hell is the best thing that can be done 
for those who die in rebellion ; therefore God has, 
in justice and mercy, provided a hell for fallen 
angels and impenitent sinners, who die unpardoned 
and unreconciled to God, as revealed in Christ Je- 
sus. 

These views, then, present the love of God in 
the only rational light — consistent with justice and 
with the principles of righteous moral government 
— with the nature of man, and especially with the 
revelation of God. In the light of the subject as 
thus exhibited, the revelation of truth, the existence 
of conscience, the influence of the church of Christ, 
the motives of the gospel, the power of the atone- 
ment, and the influence of the Holy Ghost, are all 
direct evidences of the love of God. And the 
wickedness of individuals, notwithstanding these 



154 PROBATION AND R T R I B UT I O N. 

manifestations of mercy, in refusing to repent and 
put their confidence in Christ, renders it necessary 
that they should be damned, because they will not 
be saved in consistency with their own nature, nor 
with justice, nor with the moral government of 
God. 

Another form of argument, constantly reiterated, 
is stated as follows : 

God is the Father of all men. A good father, if 
he had the power, would not permit his children to 
suffer except for their own good. God has the 
power, and therefore will permit no suffering ex- 
cept for the good or the reformation of his off- 
spring. 

In the assemblies of Universalists and Eational- 
ists this appeal is constantly made to the partialities, 
prejudices, and sympathies' of parents; and by this 
method as much as any other, they pervert the 
truth and beguile unstable minds into error. 

This position is untrue in both its parts. God 
does not act toward the family of man as a good 
earthly parent would act toward his children if he 
had the power ; nor can he do so, as we shall see, 
without a direct violation of the principles of truth 
and righteousness. A good earthly parent, if he 
had the power, would not allow his child to become 



PEOBATIOX A XI) EETEIBUTIOX. 155 



a thief, or a debauchee, or a blasphemer, or a mur- 
derer; yet God, having the poorer to prevent it, 
does permit men to commit every degree of crime. 
A good earthly parent would not permit his chil- 
dren to suffer excruciating pain by fire, accident, 
or poison, yet God permits these. A good earthly 
parent, if he had the power to prevent it, would 
not allow one child to oppress another, nor would 
he allow his children to become insane, or to blas- 
pheme the name of their father, or to injure his 
interests ; yet God has the power, and allows all 
these things among the human family. And if the 
condition of all be alike hereafter, God is unjust to 
permit one child to make another miserable during 
their whole life in this world, and then receive 
both to equal blessedness hereafter. 

But further, it would be unjust in God if he were 
to treat all men as earthly parents, under the influ- 
ence of their parental instincts, treat their children. 

God has for wise purposes implanted in the hearts 
of parents peculiar instincts. These instincts are 
constitutional, as they are in animals, and they lead 
parents to feel peculiar attachments and partialities 
for their own children, which they do not feel for 
the children of others. This natural instinct has 
been recognized as partial in all ages. It is recog- 



158 PEOBATION AND R E T K I B U T I 0 N . 

nized in all courts of justice as disqualifying parents 
and children for testifying for or against each other. 
While parents would insist upon the execution of 
the law upon others, their parental instincts would 
lead them to resist its execution upon their own 
children. Those who hear the appeal of false 
teachers upon this subject ne^er stop to reflect that 
it charges God with injustice. Earthly parents are 
partial — God is impartial. Suppose, for instance, 
that in some neighborhood a young man should 
rebel against the laws, and commit murder, or some 
crime worthy of imprisonment for life. His own 
father would shelter him from the just penalty of 
the law, and use every means that his son might 
go un whipped of justice." But what would the 
other fathers in the neighborhood do ? These 
would use all diligence to bring the guilty individ- 
ual to the justice which his crimes merited. They 
would even enter his father's house and commit 
him to the officers of the law. Now, in this case, 
which did right? Every honest man says, those 
who brought the culprit to justice ; while the father 
who concealed his son, acting as a parent, was 
partial" and a respecter of persons." Now, shall 
man be m.ore just than God? And yet skeptics 
delude their hearers by comparing the justice of Je- 



PROBATION AXD RETEIBUTIO^^. 157 

hovah. who is ''no respecter of persons," to the 
natural sympathies of this earthly parent. Will it 
not be 2:reat mercv in God to forgive such outrao^es 
upon his character ; especially after he has plainly 
said, Eom. ii. 6, that he " will render to every man 
according to his deeds — to them who hj patient con- 
tinuance in well doing seek for glory, and honor, 
and immortality, eternal life; but unto them that 
are contentious, and obey not the truth, but obey 
unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation 
and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth 
evil ; of the Jews first, and also of the Gentiles." 

Nor are men the children of God in the sense 
that Adam was the son of God. God was the im- 
mediate creator both of the soul and body of Adam. 
The first man was created holy, possessing the moral 
image of his Maker, and was the son of God in a 
sense in which Adam's posterity are not. 

Nor is it true that all men are the children of 
God in the same sense that Christians who are born 
of the Spirit are the sons of God. Like many of 
our day, the Jews, who denied the divinity of 
Christ, and expected salvation without repentance 
and faith, claimed that they were the children of 
God, and that God was their father. They said to 
Jesus (John, viii. 41-47); " We be not born of 



158 PROBATION AND RETRIBUTION. 

fornication, we have one father^ even Oody The 
reply of Christ to this assumption of wicked men 
ought to put to shame UniversalistSj Eationalists, 
and all others, who, without faith and the love of 
God, which produce obedience, yet claim to be 
God's children. Said Jesus to such individuals, 
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of 
your father ye will do," etc. 

THE TRUE VIEWS. 

God is the Universal Creator. All things were 
made by Christ, and without him was not any thing 
made that was made." Man was distinguished from 
the creatures by being created in the moral image 
of God, ^' in righteousness and true holiness." After 
God had created the original parents of the races, 
he instituted those laws, in accordance with which 
they perpetuated their earthly existence. By his 
sin man lost his holiness and his hirthright^ and the 
moral image of God, in which he was created, was 
effaced from his soul. The steps by which he fell 
(mark them) were — First Under evil influence he 
was led to doubt the truth of God's word. Second. 
Under the influence of this doubt he turned from 
holiness to disobedience. Now, in order to his 
restoration, he must return by precisely the same 



PROBATION AND BETRIBUTION. 159 

steps by whicli he departed ; only the agency under 
which he acts is the opposite one, and the steps the 
opposite way. First Under the influence of the 
Hol}^ Spirit he must place his confidence again in 
God's Word, i. e., have faith in Christ ; and, second^ 
under the influence of this faith, he must return to 
obedience, i. e., must repent. Man must be born 
again of the Spirit, and then he will have Christ, 
the image of God, again formed in his soul, the 
hope of glory." (John, i. 12, 13.) As many as 
received him, to them gave he power to become 
the sons of God, even to them that believe on his 
name ; which were born, not of blood," i. e., not 
by natural generation ; nor of the will of the 
flesh," i. e., not by the power or self-determination 
of the fleshly or carnal will ; nor of the will of 
man," i. e., not by the power of moral suasion, nor 
by the efforts of the will of men over each other ; 
" but of God," i. e., renewed by the Holy Ghost. 
The sons of God are those who are born again of 
the Spirit through the truth. None are the chil- 
dren of God, and God is a Father to none in the 
spiritual sense, except those who are willing to 
separate themselves from the unbelieving and dis- 
obedient, and by faith and repentance become as 
little children. (See 2 Cor. vi. 14, 18.) 



160 PEOBATION AND R E T R I B UT I O JST. 

When individuals are thus restored to the favor 
of God, and the image of God is restored to their 
souls, then they become heirs of God, and joint- 
heirs with Jesus Christ." They have the privileges, 
the blessings, and the inheritance of children, and 
God covenants as their father to overrule all things 
for the good of his obedient children (Eom. viii. 
28), and when it is necessary, in order to their 
spiritual good, he chastens them as a good father 
does his children, and in a manner in which those 
are not disciplined who are called in the Scriptures 
the children of this world — the children of dis- 
obedience — the children of the devil." (See 1 Cor. 
xi. 82 ; Heb. xii. 6-8.) 



LETTER X. 



EEFUTATIOX OF COMMOX FALLACIES 0^ THE SUBJECT 
OF FUTUEE RETELBUIIOX. 

My Deae Sie : — 

'We are told, as noticed in a preceding letter, 
that the woes of sin are but its antidote. Suffer- 
ing comes from Trrong-doing, as Trell-being from 
virtue. If there be suffering in the next world, it 
is, as in this, but the medicine for the sickly soul,-' 
p. 438. 

In the above sentence the usual method of the 
author is adopted. Truth is adroitly mingled with 
error. The fallacy of disciplinary punishment, as a 
cure for sin^ and the hope of universal salvation, is 
propagated in a form of words which, in proper con- 
nections, would teach a general truth. All good 
men believe that ^'suffering comes from wrong- 
doing, as well-being from ^-irtue but it does not 
therefore follow that the woes of sin are its antidote, 
either in this world or the next. 

It is true, no doubt, that good men are punished 



162 ON FUTURE RETRIBUTIOlSr. 

for their sins in this world; their discipline produces 
reform, and fits them for heaven. But it does not 
follow that the woes of sin produce the same effect 
upon the impenitent mind. Such a result in the 
case of those who are not converted is impossible, 
"because it is ly faith that discipline from the divine 
Father becomes a good in the soul. In the case of 
those who have faith, a Father's hand and a 
Father's love are seen in adverse providences. 
They receive them as discipline, and are brought 
by them into a penitent and filial temper ; and thus 
temporal afllictions are, as a matter of experience, 
a means of separating a believing mind from evil. 
But in the case of those who are without faith 
and without God in the world," temporal afflictions 
do not produce piety. Ood does not design to reform 
sinners by the woes of sin. If he does, he fails in his 
object; because some men sin, ctnd suffer the woes of sin 
all their lives, and grow worse and worse till they die. 
If, therefore, God disciplined them in order to re- 
form them, the effort was worse than a failure, be- 
cause instead of making them better, it made them 
worse. 

It is not only a fact which all but the morally 
blind can see, that the discipline which is a savor 
of life unto life" with some, is a savor of death 



ON FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 163 

unto death" witli others ; but it is likewise a dis- 
tinctly revealed doctrine of the jSTew Testament. 
" God knows how to deliver the godly out of 
temptation, and to reserve the unjust unto the day 
of judgment to be punished." The inspired writer 
says to his fellow-Christians, When ^^.'e are afflicted 
we are chastened of the Lord, that we may not be 
condemned with the worldP So far, then, as this 
world is concerned, it is matter of experience and 
of revelation that while the woes of sin are a moral 
discipline and a moral benefit to one class, they do 
not benefit the other. 

That wicked and worldly men often repent when 
they feel the consequences of their wrong-doing, 
there is no doubt. But selfish repentance "work- 
eth death." Instead of making men better, it 
makes them worse. They sorrow because they 
have injured themselves. Such repentance is selfish, 
and fits men for hell. The sorrow of the world 
worketh death." The effects of sinning upon self- 
ish minds make them worse instead of better ; and 
so far as Mr. Parker leads unregenerated men to 
believe that the woes they experience in conse- 
quence of their sins will be a cure of sin, he aids to 
fit them for the second death," These are solemn 
words, but they are true. 



164 



ON FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 



Now, without dwelling further on the philosoph- 
ical blunder, which any thoughtful mind should 
be ashamed to commit, i. e., that an effect will 
change or cure its cause, let me invite your attention 
to another aspect in which this doctrine of Mr. 
Parker (a doctrine held likewise by Emerson, 
Chapin, and all the Transcendentalists and Univer- 
salists in general) is opposed both to experience and 
revelation. 

It may be said — (because in view of preceding 
facts it must be admitted that temporal providences 
do not reform sinners) — it may be said that the 
moral relations of things^ or the operations of raarHs 
moral nature^''^ will cure sin in his soul. Now, we 
shall show that this fallacy is as absurd as the pre- 
ceding. 

Instead of sin being a self-destructive, it is a self- 
strengthening and self-perpetuating principle. In- 
stead of the consequences of a sinfid act tending 
to cure the sinful propension, it actually strengthens 
it. After one sin, another is more easily and more 
readily committed ; because the sinful act weakens 
the conscience, confirms a sinful habit, and strength- 
ens the propension to sin in the soul. As a matter 
of fact, sin blinds the moral vision, and kills the 
moral sense. The more sinful any individual be- 



ox FUTUEE RETEIBUTIOX. 



165 



comes, the less he sees and the less he feels of the 
evil of sin. This momentous moral fact can not be 
denied. It is a natural law — the law of divine 
judgment — and so long as it is true, the statement 
that the effect of sinning cures sin is a falsehood 
uttered in the face of law, experience, and the 
Scriptures. 

The doctrine that conscience punishes men for sin 
is an impeachment of the justice of God. If this 
were true, in order that God might be just, the 
greatest sinner should be the greatest sufferer. But 
the opposite of this is true. A good man will suffer 
more for neglecting his prayers, than a bad one will 
feel for the crime of profaneness. K conscience is 
the measure of God's justice, then the divine being 
loves the wicked more than he loves the good ; be- 
cause the more holy the mind, the more potent is 
conscience — the less holy, the less the infliction. 
If men are punished as they go along," and suffer 
in this world in proportion to their sin, then, as we 
have said before, Jesus Christ was the greatest of 
sinners, because he was the greatest of sufferers. 

The fact that conscience dies as sin increases, but 
grows strong in proportion to holiness, shows, by 
human experience, what is afl&rmed in the Scrip- 
tures, that the good are punished in this world, while 



166 ON FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 

the evil are reserved unto tlie day of judgment to 
be punished. 

" But/' says our philosoplier, suffering comes 
from wrong-doing, as well-being from virtue." 
Now, if this fact renders it doubtful whether there 
be any future punishment, it renders it doubtful, in 
the same measure, whether there be any future hap- 
piness. If sin punishes itself, virtue rewards itself. 
And if sin ceases to punish itself at death, then 
virtue ceases to reward itself at death ; so that there 
is neither rewards nor punishments— neither a hell 
nor a heaven, in the life to come. 

If the woes of sin will make men good, then the 
joys of goodness will make them bad. So in the 
next world. We are told that if there be any suf- 
fering, it is but the medicine of the sick soul, i. e., 
it cures sin ; then the same reasoning is valid in 
regard to heaven. If there be any enjoyment there, 
it makes the soul sick by sin : thus hell fits the 
soul for heaven, and heaven fits the soul for hell, 
one as much as the other. And we defy any man 
to show that the foundation for the argument is 
not as good on one side as it is on the other. If 
the soul, by the practice of sin will make itself holy, 
then certainly the soul, by the practice of virtue, 
will make itself sinful. 



ox FUTURE RETRIBUTION. 



167 



Let tis look, in conclusion, at the facts wliicli arc 
connected with the subject of sin and retribution. 
What are the effects of sin in this life ? and — Do 
the effects of sin continue in the future world ? 

The answers to these inquiries are plain both from 
reason and the Scriptures. Sin produces two results 
in the soul. It produces present e^n.1, while at the 
same time it fits the character for future retribution. 
Just as benevolent action produces peace and com- 
placency of soul in the present life, and forms the 
soul into a benevolent character, which fits it for 
heaven. Every one knows — Mr. Parker knows — 
that while sin produces more or less unrest when 
the act is done ; it hkewise, by the same act, fixes 
character. Like a stream which, running constantly 
over a rock, wears for itself a channel from which 
in the end it can not escape, so the soul, by con- 
tinued action of a selfish or sensual nature, forms a 
habit which fixes its mode of action for the future. 
Now, destiny depends upon character. A benevo- 
lent heart is happy in its own exercises ; a selfish 
mind is confirming a character which destroys hap- 
piness, or rather which renders happiness impossi- 
ble. All men act either from a selfish motive or a 
benevolent one. Every selfish act confirms a selfish 
character, and the man who dies having confirmed 



168 



ON FUTURE EETmBUTION". 



a selfisli character b j a selfisli life, is fitted for hell ; 
and as death is not a change of the soul but a 
change of the body, he will experience hell forever, 
unless God annihilate him after the judgment. 

Is it said now, as a final lie, that so soon as the 
soul is separated from sense, and experiences in the 
next world the evil consequences of sin, these evil 
consequences will lead to repentance. We answer 
that repentance in view of the experience of evil 
or the fear of evil, is repentance toward self, not to- 
ward God. The more men repent from an expe- 
rience of evil consequences, the more they are 
damned. The thief always repents when the sher- 
iff arrests him. Death forces many men to submit, 
others to repent. Such repentance is by necessity, 
or in view of consequences, not in view of God's 
goodness and of the evil of sin. Some weak people 
talk of repentance on the gallows. Dying sinners 
and murderers often repent, but it is a repentance 
forced in view of the termination of their moral 
agency. In this world repentance toward God" 
works by reformation ; and faith in our Lord Jesus 
Christ works by love. In the world of doom, when 
moral probation is ended, repentance, by the neces- 
sity of the case, w orks by remorse ; and faith by tremb- 
ling. The devils believe in one God and tremble." 



ON FUTUEE EETRIBUTION. 



169 



Character is the only hope of heaven. Character 
that begins with repentance unto life," and is 
formed by benevolent aspiration and action — char- 
acter which is conformed to the divine law, and 
governed by benevolent motive — which motive is 
begotten only by faith in God, as manifested in 
Christ JesTis. 

The last thought in the foregoing paragraph 
brings ns to a vital point in the divine process of 
human salvation. It introduces Christ as the mo- 
tive power, without which the soul is destitute of 
divine life. It will admit of a homily, which you 
will suffer me to give in conclusion. 

One of the darkest developments of Mr. Parker's 
infidelity — a development which indicates cardinal 
alienation from Christian character in all those who 
sympathize with it — is the contempt and hostility 
manifested toward the self-sacrifice of Christ as the 
motive and the merit by which men are saved. In 
words which caricature the Christian creed, while 
they convey the hostiHty of the author to the Chris- 
tian faith, it is written in the introduction of Dis- 
courses of Eeligion/' p. 5 (speaking of the evils of 
the prevailing rehgious ideas) : " We dare not ap- 
proach the Infinite one face to face. We whine 
and whimper in our brother's name, as though we 

S 



170 ON FUTURE RETEIBUTION. 

/ could only approacli the Infinite One by attorney." 
And again, page 432, Can men approacli the 
Everywhere-present only by attorney, as a beggar 
comes to a Turkish king ? Away with such folly. 
Christ bears his own sins, not another's." 

Has Mr. Parker forgotten that it is one of the 
most explicit commands of Christ, that after his 
sacrifice and ascension, his disciples should always 
make their supplications in his name. John, xvi. 
22-27 — And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. 
Yerily, yerily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall 
ask the Father in my name, he will give it you 
[ch. xiv. 13, "I will do it"]. Hitherto ye have 
asked nothing in my name. Ask, and ye shall re- 
ceive, that your joy may be full." " At that day 
ye shall ask in my name, and I say not unto you 
that I will pray the Father for you, for the Father 
himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and 
have believed that I came out from God." 

In accordance with this command is the practice 
of the apostles and of the church of Christ in all 
ages. 

The scoflSing of Thomas Paine was more fair in 
language and less repulsive in spirit than that of 
Mr. Parker. Thomas Paine believed in future 
retribution, and, in stating the views of Christians, 



O^' FUTUEE RETEIBUTIOX. 



171 



he did not iisiially pervert tliem. "VTe slionld be 
glad if as much could be said of Mr. Parker and 
other UniyersaJists and Transcendentahsts. It is 
easy to caricature the most sacred doctrines. The 
doctrine that Christ is Mediator between God and 
men is philosophical, experimental, and scriptural. 
Mr. Parker does not argue in opposition to this. 
The logical faculty is not developed in the Carlyle 
school to which he belongs. He utters" his in- 
tuitions'' in words which men whose fieelings are 
hostile to the gospel will love, because they travestie 
the truth. 

We say the doctrine of Christ's mediation is a 
truth which commends itself to the reason, as it 
does to the moral wants of men. [See Phil, of Plan 
of Salvation, and Book 11. of " God in Christ.''] 
All spirit, so far as we know, affects other spirits 
through organization. How does Mr. Parker know 
but that Christ is the medium (if we may so speak) 
by which God comes in contact with matter ? 'We 
know that he is the medium by which God unites 
himself with humanity. There is one God and 
one Mediator between God and men — the man 
Christ Jesus." The human soul operates through 
corporeal media upon other minds ; and upon mat- 
ter it operates through more remote instrumentali- 



172 OK FUTUEE RETRIBUTION. 

ties. Media of communication between the inferior 
and superior is the order of nature. Is not the di- 
vine Mediator in this order ? or does God contra- 
vene the order he has himself established ? 

It is a law of creation that substances as well as 
spirits come together bj af&nity. If matter or 
spirit of different affinities ever be united, a new 
medium^ or solvent, must be found by which the 
diverse qualities may be reconciled or harmonized. 
But Mr. Parker wants no mediator between him and 
the Most Holy- — no reconciliation of the earth-born 
to the Eternal — no solvent of the imperfect earthly 
that it may melt into the bosom of Infinite Love. 

Blessed be God, there is a more rational and a 
holier faith than this. The revealed Christ is the 
Mediator in the order of nature, and in the ordina- 
tion of grace. God, by the mediation of Christ, 
unites himself with our earthly and imperfect na- 
ture, and by faith the soul is transformed from a 
lower to a celestial species. On one side — the di- 
vinity — God comes in. On the other^ the humanity, 
man comes in ; so that God and man are reconciled 
in Christ. God was in Christ reconciling the 
world unto himself" 

Mr. Parker ridicules the idea of approaching God 
in the name of Jesus, and tells us that he died 



ox FUTUEE RETRIBUTION. 



178 



for liis o^n sins !" (Siich piiraseologv is wicked^ 
"but it needs a reply as well as a rebuke.) 'We are 
so constituted, that benevolent action is impossible 
with the human mind unless the motive-power 
which moves the will be drawn from another, not 
from ourselves. The man who lives and acts in 
view of Christ is God-moved : that is, his soul is 
exercised by the character of God manifested in 
Christ Jesus. The man who has no faith is self- 
moved. His own Avill is supreme, and not God's 
will. Hence he is a rebel in the moral government 
of God. When we love another, we are willing to 
deny ourselves in order to conform to the object of 
our regard. This takes the motive out of ourselves. 
If the will of that other is incarnate love, the soul 
moved by it becomes benevolent, and the soul can 
lecome henevolent in no other way. Until this is ac- 
complished, every act of life is selfish ; and thus 
life-action is death-action, which fits the soul for the 
second death. 

For Christ's sake, then, is only another expres- 
sion for the great truth, that all our holy motions 
and emotions are dependent on him. " In Christ's 
name" is a recognition that God is manifest in his 
sacrifice for sin, and that it is in his mercy alone 
that we have hope. In all systems there are two 



174 



ON FUTUEE RETIIIBUTION. 



motions of subordinate bodies, one on their own 
axis, the other around the central orbit ; so in the 
spiritual world, the soul is self-moved, and the re- 
generated soul moves likewise in its orbit of depend- 
ence on God. To feel reliance on the merit of 
Christ — to trust in Ms name — is the expression of this 
actual and practical relation. The man who does 
not feel it is dead. 

Thus the mind that draws its motive from Christ 
is a restored spirit. The affinity between the divine 
and human mind is re-united, and the soul takes on 
its eternal movement around the infinite center of 
life and love. 

0 holy One, who hath manifested thy mercy to 
us in Christ Jesus, in thy name and in thy merit 
we trust for motive to move our will, mercy to af- 
fect our heart, and for grace to pardon our sin ; and 
not unto us, but unto thee, be the glory. 

Yours in the heart of the gospel. 



LETTER XL 



eeformers axd their relation to christianity. 

My Dear Sir: — 

In the first letter of this correspondence I 
had occasion to advert to Mr. Parker as a reformer, 
and in that connection to speak with proper respect 
of his principles and the value of his labors. I 
mentioned that in the introduction of his name in 
many cases, I used it as the representative of a class. 
I wish you so to understand it still. While it is 
true that his published opinions represent, to some 
extent, all the heresies and moral vagaries of the 
times, yet as he is not alone in his glory" in rela- 
tion to many things of which we have spoken, and 
are now about to speak, we design that you should 
apply our remarks to others, and to yourself, so far 
as you muster in the same company." 

I wish in this letter to present in a connected 
and more extended form what I believe to be the 
true value of reform effort, and the relation of be- 
nevolent reforms to the gospel of Christ. I am 



176 EEFORMEES AND CHRISTIANITY. 

sorry to know that your present alienation from 
many with whom you once labored is occasioned, 
in part at least, by what you believe to be a defec- 
tion from the principles of justice and mercy on the 
part of those who claim to be, par excellence^ the 
disciples of Christ." Now, I admit your charge, 
and approve the sentiment,, if not the spirit, of your 
censure in some cases ; but the facts that seem to 
have alienated you from gospel fellowship, bind me 
more devoutly to gospel truth and influence as our 
only hope. 

While I indorse, to some extent, the denounce- 
ments which you and Mr. Parker utter against those 
who, professing to be Christians, yet by their silence, 
or in other ways, give aid and comfort to evil- 
doers still, there is often a spirit of indiscriminate 
denouncement and of uncharitableness of speech 
which indicates something else than the mind of 
Christ" in the reprover. 

Let the defection of professing Christians on the 
subject of reforms be distinctly condemned. There 
are cases which can not be contemplated by right- 
minded men without pity and abhorrence. The 
studied silence of ministers and whole denomina- 
tions in regard to one of the most demoralizing and 
anti-republican institutions under the sun — the gross 



REFOKMEES AKD CHRISTIANITY. 177 



inconsistencies of great clinrcli courts whicli con- 
demn and disfellowsMp dancers and sucli like of- 
fenders while they fellowship actual sinners — the 
defection of some who were true to humanity in the 
beginning, but have been perverted by public sen- 
timent, or awed into silence by worldly influences — 
the purchase of others by great boards or church 
powers, by offering them secretaryships, editorships, 
and such like bribes — such cases are repulsive not 
only to Christians but to all upright minds. I do 
not believe as you do, that " Jesus would class such 
men with Judas, as " a devil' whom the popular 
church power bought to betray his master yet 
that Jesus would look with disapprobation, if not 
with anger, on such men, I can not doubt. 

How far there may be palliation or apology for 
such cases of defection, it is difl&cult to see. To 
apologize for wrong-doing weakens the moral senti- 
ment against wrong. The wisest way for individual 
Christians and churches to do, would be to follow 
the advice of Albert Barnes (which he has not fol- 
lowed himself), and separate themselves from all 
church bodies and boards which tolerate and sanc- 
tify sin by giving it the communion* 

Great church organizations are thought to be ex- 
pedient, but they must, from the nature of the case^ 

8* 



178 REFORMERS AND CHRISTlAlSriT Y. 



embody in their extended limits mncli of worldly 
influence and of sin. Many of them have power 
to give men place and position. Hence they become 
the objects of idolatrous regard with some, and 
their sentiment and power control many others. It 
is not strange, therefore, that men of aspiring minds, 
who are dependent on them m a measure for posi- 
tion or reputation, should endeavor to propitiate 
their power, even so far as to tolerate and apologize 
for the sins which great bodies include in their 
bosom. They sacrifice to their net, and burn 
incense unto their drag, because by them their por- 
tion is fat, and their meat plenteous." Hab. i. 16. 

But the true Christian, while he sees the cause 
and deplores the consequence in such individual 
cases, does not, therefore, denounce all church or- 
ganization and all evangelical Christianity. Many 
who followed Christ when he announced to them 
popular truth, went back and walked no more with 
him when he announced unpopular truth. And 
one of the most enlightened of his professed friends 
betrayed him on the charge of being the enemy of 
the government. But would it have been wise in 
the men of that age, while they condemned this de- 
fection and wickedness, to have refused allegiance 
to Jesus as ^Hhe only name given under heaven 



REFORATEHS AXD CHRISTI AXIT Y. 179 

among men, bv wliicli thej mnst be saved?" On 
one sncli occasion Jesus said to tlie few faithful ones, 
Will je also go away ?" One ansAvered, Lord, 
to whom shall we o'o ? thou hast the words of eter- 
nallife?" The apostacy of those men, whose mo- 
tive is corrupted by worldly sentiment, or church 
power, will only lead the true heart to cling more 
closely to its master. 

Let us, therefore, endeavor to discriminate in in- 
dividual caseS; between what is good and evil in 
this matter. I shall follow your objections and 
allegations for the most part, but shall not deem it 
necessary to quote, in an extended form, your words. 
I wish to give your allegations all the force they 
deserve, while I show at the same time that in the 
evangelical doctrine and power of our holy religion 
is the only hope of good to men. 

You speak of Christian ministers as more Ju- 
daic than Christian, more orthodox than evangeli- 
cal in their sentiments." This I have no doubt is 
true of some of the prominent theologians of this 
and other countries. By a strange hallucination, 
the introductory and imperfect system of Moses is 
made, in many instances, the higher law in seeking 
an exposition of the teachings of Jesus. The spirit 
of both the Old and the jSTew Testaments condemns 



180 EEFORMERS AND CHKI STI ANIT Y. 

sucli a method of exposition. The Old Testament, 
in its later periods especially, looked joyfully to 
clearer light in the future. The New declared that 
^'the law made nothing perfect," else it would not 
have been superseded. Grace and truth are by Jesus 
Christ, The error of interpreting the divine teach- 
ings of Jesus in accordance with a darker dispensa- 
tion, and especially in accordance with the deterio- 
rated principles and life of the church in this age, is one 
of the evils of our times. It is an error that has 
prevailed in all ages, just in proportion as the 
church has become worldly and wicked. The most 
hopeful aspect of the age is, that a protest against 
this and kindred abuses of the gospel is rising to 
heaven, while it is stirring the hearts of thousands 
upon earth. It gathers strength and volume, and 
betokens a period of coming renovation. 

But it is likewise said that we are more orthodox 
than evangelical. The charge is true only in some 
cases. Orthodoxy without evangelism has been the 
bane of the church in all ages. The Scribes and 
Pharisees sat in Moses' seat, and in forms of faith 
and non-essentials, their teaching was correct ; and 
yet Jesus denounced them as the enemies of love 
and righteousness. The orthodox t/nevangelical 
divines are the most subtle and difficult enemies that 



KEFORMERS AND CHRI STI AKIT Y. 181 

the true cliurcli of Christ has to deal with. In the 
days of Edwards thej resisted and persecuted him. 
So they did Wesley ; so they did Whitefield. Now 
they build their tombs and laud their piety, and at 
the same time persecute and denounce other men of 
like spirit. In the next age the orthodox but un- 
evangelical theologians will build the tomb of Ed- 
wards and Finney, and persecute some other man 
of Grod that denounces the sins of his age, whether 
in the church or out of it. 

What we want is not less orthodoxy, but more 
of Christ's spirit — more love, more power in the 
hearts of the ministry. The devil may be orthodox, 
but not evangelical. The form of godliness without 
its power, is the curse of the church and the world. 
There are many churches, especially in our cities, 
from which the poor are excluded as really as 
though one of the elders stood at the door with a 
club, to strike every man who did not have the 
mark of the world on his forehead. Such arrange- 
ments are from beneath, not from above ; and many 
of those who worship there, if they have any ob- 
ject, have only a selfish one — to add heaven to 
their other possessions, just as they would add an- 
other farm to their domain. If Christ's gospel is 
true; self-seeking, lower law, orthodox, ^t7^evangeli- 



182 REFORMERS AKD CHRISTIANITY, 

cal teachers, and sucli selfish worsliipers, are not 
ministers, or members, sucli as are required in the 
New Testament church. Do not understand me as 
denouncing the ministry and the churches. God 
forbid ! Jesus did not mean to denounce the true 
church when he reprobated the formal, selfish, 
hypocritical majority of the Jewish teachers and 
worshipers. There are hundreds of true ministers 
and thousands of true Christians in the churches ; 
and true Christians are nowhere else; but now, as 
in Christ's time, they have to fight with powers and 
principalities, — with spiritual wickedness" in the 
church ; as well as ^' the world, the flesh, and the 
devil" out of the church. 

In my opinion, a reformer who is endeavoring to 
promote liberty and love in the world, is much bet- 
ter than a professor who turns a cold shoulder to 
benevolent reforms. The one, without a profession 
of the gospel, does by nature some things written in 
the gospel. The other professing the gospel, denies 
its spirit. 

It may be asked, then, ^^What advantage hath 
the Christian ?" Much, every way." His advan- 
tages are eminent and vital. Let us see. 

Society can receive its final moral renovation only 
hy Christianity^ and reforms can triumph in the end 



REFOE:irEES ASD CHRISTIANITY. 183 



only througli Christian faith. Seneca and Plato, 
■who represent the highest moral attainment without 
Christianity, say nothing abont the wickedness of 
slaveholding, and nothing about the intrinsic self- 
ishness of living for the good of the individual or 
class, and not for the good of the family of man. 
They do not announce the principles of fraternity 
and equality, nor do they reveal a faith icMch worhs 
by love to God and men. They do not require those 
who have means, light, liberty, to make self-denials 
to confer the advantages they possess on those de- 
prived of them. They did not send forth epistles 
to urge the world to worship a common Father, and 
to require men to labor for each other, as a common 
brotherhood. They did not say, " Love your ene- 
mies," " Eesist not evil," God is love, and he that 
loveth is born of God." Yet these are the vital ele- 
raents of all true reform^ and without them reforniation 
from social^ civil^ and moral evil is impossihle. With- 
out the principles of Christianity, there is neither 
the element nor the power necessary to reform the 
vrorld. 

Further. Although reform principles may pro- 
duce social progress, where they are urged and ad- 
vocated wdthout faith in Christ as a model or a 
motive, yet the result is only a temporary and a 



184 EEFOEMEES AXD CHRISTIAKITT. 



temporal good. What tlie world needs most is an 
increase of tenevolence^ something that tends to destroy 
selfishness^ and produce love to God and rao.n, ISTow, 
philosophy and religion say that love only can beget 
love. Every thing begets its kind. A selfish mind, 
by faith in Christ, becomes benevolent. Hence 
faith in Christ, as a manifestation of the love of God, 
is essential in order to motive power in the heart. 
Knowledge of truth is needful, but it is not the one 
thing needful in true reform. Those who have 
most knowledge are sometimes the worst men in 
the land. The thing wanted is love for men as a 
motive in the heart. We may know to do good, 
and have no disposition to do it. We want some- 
thing within that empowers conscience, and actuates 
the will in accordance with the conviction of right. 
This power must likewise be a love-power — a power 
moving the affections. It must be a spiritual 
power, so that we shall seek the spiritual good 
as well as the temporal good of others. It must 
likewise be a God-begotten power in the soul, or 
our effort for men will not be to make them like 
God, by leading them to love and obey him. Mere 
conviction of right, without love for man, can be 
bribed ; and there is a natural love of man that is 
mere instinct, more fully developed in some natures 



EEFOR]MEES AXD CHRISTIANITY. 



185 



than in others. This has nature, not moral motive, 
for its basis, and is easily overcome by interest, and 
perverted by selfishness and passion. Hence what 
the soul wants most after a knowledge of duty, is a 
faith that works by love — a faith that causes the 
man to act out his convictions under the influence 
of the love-motive. Now we affirm that faith in 
Christ as the model and the motive, gives the soul 
this guide and this power. Eeform without gospel 
faith may accomplish good, but it will be a good 
that is earthly and local in its nature, and that does 
not rise to the unselfish, the immortal, and the spir- 
itual. God's love for man was revealed in Christ, 
and man's love for man is begotten by faith in 
Christ. Without this vitalizing faith, reform will 
be a mere struggle of natural benevolence against 
the predominating selfishness of the church and the 
world. Tlie struggle will promote self-righteousness on 
the one hand^ and increase malignity on the other. 

But, more than all, the true Christian aims to 
bless all the interests of man. He looks upon man 
as an immortal being — as having a soul as well as 
a body. To emancipate a slave does not change his 1/ 
character nor reform his morals. To do good to 
men temporally is good — to do good to them tem- 
porally and spiritually is both better and best. 



186 KEFORMEES AND CHRISTIANITY. 



Freedom from sin is a greater blessing than free- 
dom from slavery. The gospel aims to accomplisli 
both. Eeform, then, without Christianity, is but a 
partial, a temporal, and an imperfect good. The 
principle, the spirit, and the power of reform are 
combined in the gospel. 

There may be activity in reform which is accom- 
panied with a wrong spirit. The denunciatory re- 
former would engage tiimself in the evil he denounces 
if his locality or circurastances were altered. Some of 
the most self-elated, self-suflS.cient, and self seeking 
men that I have known, have belonged to this class 
of reformers. They labor for the right with a self- 
ish and wrong spirit. They speak the truth in 
HtternesS; and hence their truth becomes an occa- 
sion of hardening evil-doers, almost as much as the 
withholding or perverting of truth by the self-seek- 
ing and the unsanctified in the churches. The dif- 
ference is, that truth, even though it be uttered in 
a bad spirit, will enlighten and awaken conscience 
in men — it will produce agitation, and hence ulti- 
mate benefit ; while to pervert or withhold truth, is 
to refuse the only remedy which the Almighty 
prescribes for the evil of sin. 

Let us have reform then — reform both in Church 
and State. Progress is the order both of the phys- 



eefoe:mers axd cheistiaxity. 187 

ical and the moral -world. But we can have no per- 
manent reform without the impulse and guidance 
of faith in Christ. The stability of reform must be 
conscience, and the impulse in reform must be love. 
But conscience and love are generated alone by 
faith in Christ. "When the reformer moves in the 
sublimity of power, the momentum is generated in 
the heart. 

Yours for the right^ the true^ and the good. 



LETTER XII. 



reforms and reformers. 

My Dear Sir : — 

Permit me now, in conclusion, to notice what 
I believe to be mistakes and mischiefs in the meth- 
ods and opinions of Mr. Parker and his class of 
reformers. 

No one doubts but that a great advance will yet 
be made in promoting equality and fraternity among 
men. There are abuses in the social usages of the 
world that need to be reformed ; and the inquiry 
with the philanthropist and the Christian is, by 
what means can we best remove evil and promote 
good ? Now, I for one, as you know, believe that 
but little good can be achieved by any one, no mat- 
ter how good the intention may be, unless Chris- 
tianity, according to the orthodox interpretation^ be 
made the central and vital element in the effort. 

Some years ago there was a mania abroad in the 
land in regard to associated labor ; and many men 
of good intentions— men who really supposed that 



REFOE]MS A^^'D EEFORMERS. 189 

the highest good of themselves and others could 
be promoted by comra on-stock and common-labor 
communities — united themselves in associations 
formed more or less on the Fourier plan. Wise 
Christian men knew the experiments would fail ; 
but it required a large number of experiments, and 
immense losses of property, and the wrecking of 
many families, to convince the friends of the scheme 
that it was impracticable for the ends they proposed 
to gain. Associations which receive the Christian 
faith as a bond of union have generally succeeded. 
Such were the common-stock associations of the 
early church of Christ ; such are the Moravian as- 
sociations, and others that might be named. But 
associations founded on selfish principles can not 
succeed. The motive inducing the effort is a self- 
destructive one. The members of such associations 
are drawn together, each one, by the motive to pro- 
mote his own happiness and ease. Each individual 
seeks his own good as the supreme end, and uses 
the association as a means. Thus it is an aggregate 
of self-seeking minds. Every selfish effort strength- 
ens the selfish principle in them, and an explosion 
in the end follows as a natural consequence. The 
Christian association seeks the good of the world by 
means of association. In their motive and labor 



190 



REFORMS AND REFORMERS. 



the members seek to please Christj not themselves. 
For this end they make self-denials, because they 
have a higher aim than self. They can find happi- 
ness in any labor which will promote the common 
object. Self is not supreme, but subordinate. With 
such motives association is possible, and generally 
profitable to the members, conducive to individual 
happiness, and to the glory of God. 

All efforts of a philanthropic character should be 
encouraged up to the line of practicability and 
utihty, hit ultra action pjvdiices re-action ; and there 
are many men of good intentions and enthusiastic 
minds who have little wisdom to judge either of 
human character or the feasibility of schemes to 
promote human good, who engage in popular re- 
forms. The scheme of Christ includes the whole 
family of man. Its means are available and benef- 
icent, and adapted to its end. It seeks to engage 
every individual both as a recipient and a dissemi- 
nator of its blessings. It is pitiful to see those who 
evidently are not so wise as Christ, rejecting the 
divine scheme for a chimera of their own weak or 
wicked minds. 

Christianity favors efforts that will benefit men 
temporally as well as spiritually. The Christian 
can labor with those who reject Christ, in schemes 



EEFOEMS AXD EEFOEMERS. 191 

to promote the mere temporal good of men, pro- 
vided there be nothing to hinder him from seeking 
in addition to this their highest good, by promoting 
that faith which alone gives peace and right motive 
in the soul. Most or all reforms that aim, in the 
estimation of worldly men, merely at the temporal 
good of men, are auxiliary to Christianity, and 
hence Christians should aid in promoting them, not 
only for temporal but ultimate good. 

The land reform has beneficent phases. Monop- 
oly of land is an injury and an evil. The system 
of Moses gave each family of each generation the 
privilege of accumulating, while yet it caused the 
fee of the soil to revert once in fifty years, thus pre- 
venting monopoly of soil by industrious parents for 
indolent children. This was the wisest and most 
comprehensive scheme possible. In our own coun- 
try, at the beginning, something like this reversion 
law might have been adopted. And even now, 
while the rewards of industry should be sacredly 
protected, a policy should be adopted to prevent a 
monopoly of the untilled soil by men of capital. 
Let capital have its reward in other directions, but 
not by excluding actual cultivators of the land, nor 
by raising the prices of the virgin soil against those 
who desire to cultivate. 



192 REFORMS AND REFORMERS. 



The yagaries of reformers wlio make no allowance 
for the different degrees of bodily or mental strength 
in individuals — who would give indolence the same 
reward as industry — who would give the wicked a 
bribe, and vice the means of indulgence, are con- 
trary to nature, and injurious to good morals. Such 
vagaries are worse than weakness. Every plan that 
does not reward industry, calculation, and enterprise, 
is at war with virtue, and in league with vice. In 
this country, where all have equal chances, the 
prevention of monopolies is the main duty of those 
who seek to promote human welfare. 

But in all associations, whether for reformation or 
for social protection and benefit, there is one central 
and universal defect which can be remedied only by 
Christianity. 

The masonic institution, and other secret asso- 
ciations, may seek to some extent the moral and 
temporal good of their members, and of those con- 
nected with their members ; but secret association 
gives men an advantage of their neighbors, if they 
are willing to take it. And beside, such associa- 
tions are good or bad according to the character of 
their individual members. Where the general 
prevalence of Christianity has made the members 
better, lodges are better. Where the temperance 



EEFOKMS A^^D REFOKAIEES. 



193 



reform banishes intoxicating drinks, lodges are 
sober. They are in themselves good or evil as 
Christian agencies from without the lodge have 
affected them. 

Then there is still the central defect, a selfish mo- 
tive. Providence has made a difference in the con- 
dition of men. Some are defective in body, in 
mind, in health. Some are laboring under evils by 
circumstances which societj^ has induced. For 
these no selfish association can n;ake provision. 
Christianity brings the influence of love, fraternity, 
and the authority of Christ to bear on its disciples, 
as motives to induce them to relieve those who, by 
providential arrangements, need relief, without re- 
spect of persons, of birth, or of sex. The most de- 
crepid and needy are to be aided first, whether they 
be in one set of circumstances or another. Chris- 
tianity is the complement of Providence. It is the sys- 
tem God has ordained to work into the inequalities 
of natural providence, and thus to balance natural 
evil by moral good. Provident associations of me- 
chanics, or moral associations for the promotion of 
temperance and virtue, may be auxiliary to this 
great end ; but Christianity alone, by church organ- 
ization and by individual effort and beneficence, 

meets the imperfections of natural providences and 

9 



194 



KEFORMS AND REFORMEES. 



balances tliem. Hence Christianity is a part of the 
divine economy of the world ; and if its reqnire- 
ments were fully carried out, in act and spirit, there 
would be no evils to reform which would not be 
reached by human agency. 

It is evident, then, that reformers, even if en- 
gaged in a good cause, are fools and blind in all 
cases, just so far as they reject the plan and the 
power offered by evangelical Christianity. 

Those who seek to promote what are called 
\ woman's rights," have a good object in view so far 
{ as they aim to promote equal legislation in relation 
to marital rights and parental duties. They pursue 
laudable objects when they seek to ameliorate the 
condition of female workers, and to advance wages 
in all cases in proportion to the value of the service. 
But when they labor to make women pubhc speak- 
ers, or public actors in politics, or in any masculine 
endeavor^ they are doing injury to society by acting 
against the constitution of nature and the revealed 
will of God. 

The male is armed by nature for defense. He is 
strong to provide. He is voiced for public speech. 
/ The female is unarmed, and voiced only for social 
speech. A hen can crow, but it is ridiculous, and 
indicative of unmaternal qualities, when she does. 



REFORMS AST) REFORMERS. 195 

A womarij by an effort against nature, can give a 
public harangue, and can say tilings often more 
witty and beautiful than most men would say on 
the same subject. So some men could do certain 
domestic duties better than some women ; but the 
change to accommodate the exceptions would be 
unnatural and unwise. There is no public speak- 
ing to be done that can not find advocates of the 
best taknt among men : and the influence which 
social effort will produce for any cause in which a 
woman ought to be interested, will always be 
gTcater and better than any she could exercise by a 
public exhibition of herself We say public ex- 
hibition of herself, because there are many persons 
who will go to see a woman speak in public^ that 
attend to look at her person and gestures, and the 
flush of her excitement ; and for no better purpose. 
Public places and speeches attract all sorts of char- 
acters. A woman may excite certain characters to 
applause which arises from a source that a chaste 
mind would abhor. Continued attention to work 
or office, every week for years, is of most value in 
all responsible labors. This married women could 
not give. Hence, male duties and wages, in such 
cases, is impossible. 

The contention for the ballot is an indication of 



196 EEFOKMS AN'D REFOEMERS. 

like folly. The ballot is not given, as the common 
plea supposes, to represent property. If that were 
so, the rich would vote, as the slaveholders dO; for 
their chattels. Every man who is a citizen has a 
ballot, whether he own property or not. "Where 
the property of the country is represented in legis- 
lative bodies by those who have an equal interest 
with others, then every property-holder is repre- 
sented whether they cast their ballot or not. 

The incongruity to nature and circumstances of a 
woman's making speeches and voting is so palpa- 
ble, that the evil can never gain much favor with 
the public. If all women were to vote, it would 
only double the number of votes, without increas- 
ing the strength of either side in civil questions, 
and if they had a ballot-box of their own, the Irish 
Catholic women would kill off our wives. In moral 
questions, the social influence of women to lead 
men to vote right is greater in the result than anj^ 
thing that could be gained by antagonistic public 
action. Nature has made men the providers and 
the protectors, and has devolved duties upon a mar- 
ried woman that incapacitates her from providing, 
while it renders her necessarily the inmate of the 
home. The duties of most men require all days of 
the year in a steady employment. Nature forbids 



REFOE:y:s a^^d iiefoh:m:ees. 



197 



this ability to woman. A "woman's rights" lady 
mio-ht say to her like-minded sister, " Send your 
son John down this evening, and I will let my 
daughter Lucy go home with him after dark, to 
j)rotect him from night rowdies but such a speech 
would be supremely ridiculous ; — not more so, how- 
ever, than the aims of Mr. Parker and others, who 
adopt the vagaries of foolish men and women in 
regard to what they call " woman's rights." 

Let the women rule where only true happiness is 
found — in the home and social circle. Let the men, 
as nature requires, rule in public works, public as- 
semblies, and out-door life. In families, as there 
can be only one will in relation to removals, ex- 
penditures, and many joint interests, if there be two 
opinions, after kind examination, which is seldom 
the case, then, as one will must govern in the case, 
the nature of things, in all ordinary instances, makes 
the husband's will supreme. If one or the other 
must yield, the husband is by the law of nature and 
revelation, the head of the family. 
- As we have stated, there is provision made against 
the possibiUty of much evil from the hallucinations 
of ultra refcrmers in this direction ; but their effort 
repels many who desire to promote real reform. 
There are employments which women might fill — 



198 REFOEMS AND REFORMERS. 

there are trades -whicli they might learn. In the 
practice of some branches of the medical profession 
women might do much good, and in some cases do 
it more appropriately than men. Let us not cease 
then to seek the good in this matter because of the 
vagaries of fools. 

There is a class of reformers who are moved by 
their sympathies rather than by the reason and just- 
ice of the case. This class of men sometimes be- 
come dangerous to the vfcU-being of society. They 
, sympathize with scoundrels, and seek to save them 
/from just penalties. They would make the peni- 



tentiary a place of comfortable retirement for vil- 
lains ; and thus induce such a state of things, that 
those who had never been there, would have no 
dread of the crime that would send them there ; and 
those who had been there would be prepared for 
any villainy, if going back to light labor and com- 
fortable quarters was the only consequence. To 
provide for the health and moral reform of criminals 
is proper, but to make their penalty a punishment 
is a duty, which it is crime against society to neglect. 

The persons alluded to may be called instinctive 
reformers, becauses their impulses are organic, not 
moral. They frequently misdirect their compassion, 
because the impulse, in their case, is the highest 




REFORMS AIs-D REFORMERS. 199 



law. But as subjection of tlie will to instinctiye 
compassion is mncli better than subjection of the 
will to a corrupt public sentiment, hence the natural 
reformer may be a better man than a corrupt Chris- 
tian teacher. But both are wrong in the main 
matter. There is the susceptibility of sympathy 
even in the lower animals. When one suffers, its 
cry will rally others of its class to the rescue. 
When the cry of distress is heard among animals, 
if one should take sides with the enemy that was 
crushing its suffering fellow, instead of rallying to 
the relief, it would be an apostate even from the 
best principles of brute nature. The '^natural re- 
former" obeys the highest impulses of his nature — 
the professed Christian, who is not a reformer, has 
apostatized both from the higher impulses of hu- 
manity and from Christ. But the true Christian 
obeys Christ, omd ly faith the higher instincts of hu- 
manity become rational and moral in their exercise. 

Let us apply these principles to some of the ultra 
notions of Mr. Parker and others. They speak of 
capital punishment, and denounce those who main- 
tain the justice of the death penalty. They do this 
in common ad captandum phrase Now, while it is 
admitted that none but the willful and deliberate 
murderer should die, it can not be shown that the 



200 EEFORMS AND REFOEMERS. 

Scriptures, or tlie principles of mercy guided by 
justice and reason, would permit the deliberate mur- 
derer to live. Sympathy with the mere suffering of 
criminals is suspicious. 

Suppose I witness a pirate-sbip attack a packet, 
and murder in cold blood the crew and passengers. 
I witness immediately after a revenue- cutter attack 
the pirate, and destroy tbe murderers of the inno- 
cent. There was as much of animal suffering iu 
the one case as the other. But if I feel for the suf- 
ferings of the pirates as I do for the murdered pas- 
sengers, I am a brute, possessing blind compassion 
without a sense of justice ; or else I am a pirate at 
heart, sympathizing with like character. 

It is painful to read the remarks of such reform- 
ers when they talk mawkishly about the momentary 
suffering of the murderer, while not a word is said, 
and apparently not an emotion felt, in view of the 
various, protracted, and excruciating sufferings 
which the villain may have inflicted upon his in- 
nocent victim. 

It is an error to place the mercy of the New Test- 
ament in antagonism to capital punishment. The 
cardinal principles of the Christian Scriptures recog- 
nize the rectitude of the voluntary suffering of in- 
dividuals, when it is necessary for the good of the 



KEFOEMS AND EEFOKMEES. 



201 



whole, and of penal infliction when necessary as 
penalty for violated law. Even the death-penalty 
is recognized as proper v^hen executed as a pen- 
alty. Paul says, " If I have done any thing worthy 
of death^ I refuse not to die." Thus implying that 
such crimes were possible, and such penalty proper. 
The Mosaic institutions were for a peculiar people, 
in the initiatory stages of civilization and piety ; 
but the Great Teacher sanctioned the death-penalty 
under the law of Moses, and thereby taught that 
taking life as a penalty is not wrong in itself. 
Hence the true inference is, that while it may be 
proper under the gospel to abate the death-penalty 
in all minor cases of crime, yet the infliction of the 
penalty on the part of society can never be shown 
to be wrong in itself. Jesus said to the Scribes 
and Pharisees who had abrogated the death-penalty 
in the case of the drunken, stubborn, and rebellious 
son that cursed his parents, and could not be re- 
formed (Matt. XV.), God commanded^ saying^ Honor 
thy father and thy mother^ and he that curseth father or 
mother let him die the death ; but ye say otherwise, 
and thus ^ make the commandment of God of none 
effect: " 

The ultimate principle, admitted by all, is, that as 
life is the highest individual good, it should be pro- 



202 



REFORMS AND REFORMERS. 



tected by the highest penalty. If no other than the 
death-penalty will so certainly protect the life of the 
innocent^ then those who would spare the life of the mur^ 
derer^ d.o it at the expense of the life of the innocent, 
Now it has never been proved, and can not be, that 
imprisonment for life is a security against future 
murder by the condemned. A criminal was con- 
demned by a jury to be hung for deliberate mur- 
der, in a neighboring State^ a few years since. 
This penalty was commuted to imprisonment for 
life. In less than three years, he was pardoned ; 
and for the crimes he has since since committed in 
Texas, the sympathizers with, this murderer are 
guilty. 

Commutation, or sentence to life imprisonment, 
endangers witnesses botb before and after trial. A 
man of fifty commits a theft. He knows an impris- 
onment of ten years will follow the proof. Will he 
not thus be bribed to murder the witness? His 
penalty for both crimes can be no greater than that 
for the least ; and if he murders the witness he 
hopes to escape. Will not the discontinuance of 
the death, penalty transform most thieves into mur- 
derers ? It has done so in many cases. If they 
commit the murder it is only imprisonment for a 
longer term, and that penalty doubtful ; if they kill 



REFOEMS A^B REFORMERS. 203 



their victim, his testimony is impossible, and chances 
of escape are greater, while the penalty is in many 
cases no greater. Will it not take awaj' from the 
public mind an impression of the sanctity of life, and 
thus in the estimation of villains decrease their sense 
of the guilt of murder ? Michigan has been for 
some years the paradise of villains, owing, as all 
reason teaches, to the low estimate of guilt, and the 
light penalty of crime prevailing in that State. A 
virtuous community will punish the guilty. An 
immoral community will punish them by impulse, 
or not at all. The remission of the death-penalty 
has produced in Wisconsin, and is now producing 
in some other States, the most dreadful outrages. 
The conscience which God has given men says the 
murderer should die. This has been its testimony 
in all ages and in all time. When an immoral phi- 
lanthro;py remits the death-penalty, natural con- 
science is outraged, and men rise in mobs to inflict 
vengeance upon the murderer. 

The pleas usually urged against the death-penalty 
have no real foundation either in morals or in rea- 
son. It is said that in some cases the innocent 
suffer death, and no remuneration can be made. 
So they may suffer imprisonment for life, and no 
remuneration can be made. Imperfection may at- 



204 KEFOEMS Al^D KEFORMERS. 

tach to all law and penalty that is based upon tes- 
timony ; but even this possible evil miglit be 
guarded against by sentence of imprisonment, with- 
out pardon, when doubt of the fact were possible. 

It is said, again, that society, when it takes life 
for life, commits the same crime with the malefactor. 
Shame on vsuch solecisms ; then when we confine a 
murderer for life, we commit a crime equal in guilt 
to that of the criminal. When society takes a cer- 
tain sum as penalty from a man who damaged his 
neighbor, it commits the same offense with the 
criminal, does it ? If there were a society of devils 
for the promotion of crime, such arguments would 
receive a premium. 

But life is sacred. It ought not to be taken in 
any case. It can be forfeited only to him who gave 
it. The statement is false in fact and in theory. 
If Mr. Parker were attacked by an assassin, with 
deadly weapons, and with the known intent to kill, 
it would be his duty to save his own life by taking 
the life of the murderer. Now, is not life forfeited 
as much after the act as before ? It is certain that 
the guilt is as great, and that justice and universal 
conscience would afl&rm the same penalty after as 
before the fact. 

It is said society is guilty in view of the imperfect 



REFOEMS AXD refoe:\iers. 205 

proyision made for the moral and intellectual train- 
ing of the masses of the people. If our school sys- 
tem be inadequate or partial, it should be reformed 
and strengthened ; but this, while it would prevent 
the development of evil, in raany cases would not 
prevent crime. It is a fallacy to argue that the 
absence of remedies used to prevent an evil is the 
cause of that evil. If the argument were true, all 
who have inadequate intellectual and moral training 
would be alike criminals ; which statement is false 
and slanderous. 

It is said, again, by the philosophers of the 
Fowler school, that the propensity to crime is or- 
ganic ; that criminal acts arise from the unbalanced 
impulsion of certain developments ; and that there- 
fore the criminal should be an object of pity rather 
than a subject for penalty. If this be true, then 
the Calvinistic system, which these reformers take 
pains to deride, is true in its utmost stringency. K 
this were true, then murderers should be extermi- 
nated for the same reason that we kill a viper or a 
tiger. Both are the natural enemies of human life ; 
and reform in one case would be just as possible 
as in the other. The Chinese, who kill both the 
criminal and his children to prevent the propagation 
of crime, would be right. Such a philosophy ig- 



206 REFORMS AXD REFORMERS. 

nores reform efforts of all kinds. Eeform in that 
case would be possible only by knocking in tlie evil 
developments on tke bead with a hammer. The 
Fowler philosophy perpetrates the error of all 
superficial thinkers. It takes facts, true only as a 
general expression, and derives particulars from 
them. It likewise applies its principles wrong-end. 
foremost. It makes development govern mind in- 
stead of urging the true application, that it is the 
character of the mind that produces the peculiarities 
of development in the body. The seed produces 
the tree — not the tree the seed. A bad spirit pro- 
duces bad development. The law of creation and 
of philosophy agTces with the Scriptures that *^ every 
seed produces its own body, and ' so it will be in the 
resurrection,'' " 

But it is argued that murderers dread imprison- 
ment for life as much as they do the gallows. AU 
facts, and all consciousness in all men, deny this as- 
sertion. If this be true, why do criminals and their 
friends seek a commutation of penalty ? Why do 
all murderers joyfully accept commutation? Even 
the devil concedes the falsehood of this statement 
when he said, All that a man hath will he give 
for his life." 

Penalty is designed to prevent as well as to pun- 



eefoe:ms axd eefoe:^ees. 



207 



ish crime. The death -penalty is the highest re- 
straint that can possibly be opposed to murder. 
Murder is nnlike all other crimes. It is the crime 
of crimes : but it can never be distinguished as such 
without inflicting upon the murderer the highest 
penalty. By the death penalty the murderer is 
taught to value the life of others as he does his 
own. Tliis is the golden rule. And unless death be 
the penalty, a villain meditating crime can never 
value the life of another as he does his own. By 
the imprisonment-penalty he is taught to value the 
life of his neighbor as little as he values imprison- 
ment in the penitentiary. Who dares to teach 
murderers this low estimate of life ? 

It is said that facts and statistics prove that im- 
prisonment is a remedy as effectual in preventing 
murder as the death-penalty. This is not proved ; 
and I beheve it is not true. Facts, as far as they 
go, prove the contrary. The instances alleged in 
favor of abolishing the death-penalty, those of Cath- 
arine of Eussia and the government of Tuscany, 
were of too short duration to prove any thing. On 
the other side, we have the case in the German 
States, where the statistics are accurate, and suflB.- 
cient time for a fair experiment has been allowed. 
The Conversation-Lexicon," a work of the highest 



208 



EEFORMS AND REFORMERS. 



authority concerning Grerman topics, says, Those 
States where, from a one-sided benevolence, the 
government wished to abolish capital punishment, 
were compelled again to avail themselves of it, and 
that on the groimd that in the opinion of men death 
is the greatest of evils, in preference to which they 
would willingly undergo the most laborious life, 
with some hopes of escape from it, because the 
death-penalty is the most terrible of penalties." 

Wordsworth, a man of the most highly-endowed 
intellect, the purest and the warmest benevolence, 
in the London Quarterly Review^ No. 137, says : 

Whenever it appears to be good for mankind, ac- 
cording to the arrangements of Providence, that 
death should be inflicted by human ministration, it 
is a false humility^ a false humanity^ and a false piety ^ 
for a man to refuse to be the instrument.""^ 

Eobespierre resigned his ofl&ce in early life rather 
than sign a warrant for the execution of a criminal. 
His future life showed him to be a monster destitute 
by nature of the sense of justice. 

The following passage in Blackstone (Book IV. 
chap, i.) should not be forgotten : ^' In France the 
punishment of robbery, either with or without mur- 
der, is the same ; hence it is that though perhaps 
* See Cheever on Capital Punishment. 



EEFOE^ylS AND EEF0R:^ERS. 



209 



they are subject to fewer robberies, yet tliey never rob 
hut they also raurder. In China murderers are cut 
to pieces, but robbers not ; hence in that couDtrv 
they never murder on the highway^ though they often 
rob." Is not this satisfactory proof that the man, 
or the legislature, that^ through sympathy with 
criminals, aids to abohsh the death-penalty, thereby 
stimulates yillains to murder the innocent. 

If this is not sufficient, take a fact nearer home. 
Capital punishment was abolished several years 
since in Michigan. The grand jury of "W^ayne 
County in that State made a presentment to the 
legislature, in which they say : Facts, we are in- 
formed, have occurred in our midst, proving that 
some of the murderers in this county have been 
influenced and urged forward to their deeds of 
wickedness through the consideration that the death- 
penalty has been abolished from our penal code." 

Much might be added, showing that in some cases 
imprisonment for life is a bribe to commit murder ; 
in other cases it is no penalty, and in all cases it 
places the murderer where no further penalty for 
crime is. possible. He may murder his keeper ; he 
may poison the prison well, and thus murder all the 
inmates ; his life is sacred, and he is above law ; 
no further penalty can be inflicted. 



210 REFOKMS AND REFORMERS. 

That paragraplL of your letter wMcli is designed 
to have a point touched with sarcasm, which alludes 
to the repentance of murderers and the hanging of 
Christians, is to be regretted. The Bible nowhere 
teaches that willful murderers ever exercise repent- 
ance "unto life. No murderer hath eternal life 
abiding in him." That murderers repent, no one 
doubts. Judas repented and went to his own 
place." Eepentance is either selfish or holy. If 
it is repentance in view of the consequence to one's 
self, it produces remorse, or deceives the mind. 
Every criminal repents when the hand of the sheriff 
is on his shoulder. , This is forced repentance. • It 
is the murderer's repentance. It is honest repent- 
ance. But it is repentance unto death." Not 
holy repentance, produced by faith in Christ. 

Some I know believe that true repentance in such, 
cases is possible. If it he possihle, the death-penalty is 
much more likely to produce repentance than the pen- 
alty of imprisonment. Dr. Webster, w^hile there was 
hope of escape or commutation, maintained the 
falsehood that he was innocent. When sentence 
was passed, and pardon or commutation denied, he 
became penitent and truthful. In Bemis' Eeport," 
in Webster's last conversation wdth the sheriff he 
says : All the proceedings in my case have been 



KEFORMS Aj^D REFORMERS. 211 

just. The court have discharged their duty. The 
law officers of the commonwealth did their duty, 
and no more. The verdict of the jury was just. 
The sentence of the court was just ; and it is just 
thai I should die on the scaffold^ in accordance with 
that sentenced Thus does the sentence of death, 
when there is no hope of escape, produce in some 
cases honest repentance. In Webster's statement 
that his sentence was just, and that he deserved to 
die, we have the same evidence given in many other 
cases when the crime is confessed. It is the deci- 
sion of the human conscience, one which ought not 
to be violated, that the man who deliberately takes 
the life of his neighbor forfeits his own. The man 
who refuses to award this highest penalty to the 
highest crime manifests a corrupted sj^mpathy, re- 
jects the decisions of an honest conscience, and the 
conviction of human reason in all ages, and 
strengthens the hands of the guilty against the in- 
nocent. 

Yours truly. 

"We have now traveled over the Philosophical, the 
Theological, and Eeform vagaries of Theodore Par- 
ker, and have occasionally referred to others who 
are affiliated with the abnormal moral movements 



212 EEFOEMS AND EEFORMEES. 

of our times. We have endeavored to separate the 
pure from the vile, and to reject nothing good, while 
■we repudiated the evil. Perhaps we have, in our 
desire to grant all that charity demanded^ allowed 
some things to stand as truth which the better- 
informed may condemn as error. We have done 
what we could. To God and sincere inquirers we 
commend the effort. 



LETTER XIIL 



WRITTEN EEYELATION A NECESSITY IN OEDER TO THE 
MORAL DEYELOPMENT AND MORAL PROGRESS OF 
MANKIND. 

My Dear Sir : — 

You express a doubt whether there be any 
Eevelation as I understand that word, and invite a 
statement of reasons^ Health will scarcely per- 
mit me to pursue this correspondence, yet the hopes 
awakened by your last note encourage me to give 
" reasons for the faith that is in me." 

I think it was the son of Su^ach who said that 
all things are set over against each other." A 
wiser than either Sirach or his son sajs, ^'Man was 
not made for the Sabbath, but the Sabbath for 
man." 

There is a collocation of the providences of God 
with the developments of human life ; and there is 
an adjustment of moral appliances and means to hu- 
man faculties, in order to produce the progTCSsive 
development of the human family. Wherever any 



214 



WKITTEK EEYEL ATIOJSr. 



distinct adaptation in tlie universal fitness of things, 
is seen to be harmonious with other adjustments 
and perfect in itself, the conclusion is infallible that 
it is a part of that stupendous whole" whose 
builder and maker is God." 

Now, Mr. Parker will no doubt admit the validity 
of this principle as applied to the natural world ; 
but he will deny that the Bible is of God, and that 
its dispensations have an adaptation to the moral 
progress of mankind. 

With Mr. Parker and his class of thinkers, reason 
and conscience are the highest guides of men ; with 
the Christian, reason when enlightened by divine 
- revelation, and conscience when empowered by di- 
vine authority, unite in the guidance of men. 

Now, in my opinion this question can be settled. 
It can be shown that the Christian is right, and that 
the Bible is a necessary means in order to the de- 
velopment of man as an individual, and of mankind 
as a family. 

We inquire, then, is the Bible of God ? Was it 
made for man ? 

Let me premise that in the remarks which follow 
I do not propose to discuss any question concerning 
discrepancies in the Old Testament. There may be 
historical discrepancies and interpolations — there 



WEITTEX EEYELATIO^'. 



215 



may be fables added in some of the minor books to 
the proper matter of revektion — there may be books 
in the canon whose places are not rightly adjusted. 
These questions we leave to the learned. Men of 
sense will inquire concerning the only thing that 
is of vital interest to them, i. e., Was the dispensa- 
tion given by Moses revealed by divine authority 
to the Jews ? and is the Christian dispensation a 
perfect, ultimate, and obligatory dispensation from 
God designed for all mankind, ''to be manifested 
[to alT\ in due timef 

In speaking of the Old Testament as revealed to 
and for the Jews, we do not hence infer that as 
Christians we have no moral connections with the in- 
troductory dispensation. My views of this connec- 
tion you have read, and the Chiistian public, on 
both sides of the sea, have approved, in the volume 
referred to. I make the preceding suggestions, only 
that your mind may be separated from some things 
which seem to trouble you, but which are not of im- 
portance in connection with our present inquiries. 

Mr. Parker, and the skeptics generally, hold that 
reason— including intuitional and reflective reason 
— is a sufficient guide for men in matters relating 
to God. We can not see how men who are convers- 
ant with human history, some of whom have made 



216 



WKITTEJSr REVELATION. 



pMlosopliy a study, can adopt sucb. an opinion. 
The highest result that reason can give on this 
subject has been worked out in such a variety of 
circumstances, that a man who fails to learn a les- 
son that all experience teaches, must have a will 
over which reason has, in some measure, lost its in- 
fluence. 

The testimony of universal experience is, that all 
men have an idea of the existence of God. But men 
can not have an intuition of the character of God, 
for the plain reason that a knowledge of character 
implies comparison^ quality, and hence requires a 
process of reason. It is a shallow fallacy in philos- 
ophy, that Mr. Parker should assume, as he does, 
that men have an innate idea of the character as 
well as the being of God. The moral duties of men 
to each other may be learned in a good measure l)y 
experience, even up to the measure of the golden 
rule. I know the effect which the conduct of an- 
other has upon myself. I judge of that conduct, 
whether it is in itself right or wrong ; and hence, 
by this process, I can determine what would be 
right in my neighbor's case, were our circumstances 
changed. Keason is clouded in men, and it is de- 
veloped slowly in nations ; hence, while rules of 
human morality may be developed by reason, yet 



WRITTEN EE V ELATION. 



217 



it is only in the best ages and in the highest minds 
that these higher moral conceptions have appeared. 
But the character of God and the duties of man to 
his Maker, are different things. Man without faith 
has no immediate experience of the divine character, 
and having a mixed experience by Providence, it is 
absolutely impossible for reason to clothe the idea 
of God with the moral attributes which belong to 
the divine nature. 

Now, the universal experience of nations and races 
of men has certified these facts. The highest attain- 
ment of reason in relation to God has been skepti- 
cism, or diversity. This was the result in India, in 
Greece, in Eome, in France, in Germany, and in 
America. In all ages and nations which have fur- 
nished an opportunity for the ultimate development 
of the reason, the results have been the same. 

Greece gathered all the gods of all nations into 
her capital city. This was the ultimatum of human 
reason, in the direction of variety. Her philos- 
ophers believed in a divine being ; but, while they 
doubted of all the idolatries of the people, they dif- 
fered as much among themselves as the people did 
in relation to prevalent superstitions. Such was 
also the development in Eome. TuUy and others 

expressed the ultimatum of reason in the affirmation, 

10 



218 WRITTEN REYELATIOK. 



tbat all things in relation to tlie gods and the future 
world were matters of doubt. 

Eeason reached the same ultimatum in France and 
Germany. Eevelation in those countries was either 
forbidden or perverted. The people followed the 
prevailing superstition, while the philosophers 
reached a skepticism that was malignant and terri- 
ble in its effects on human character and human 
happiness ; so terrible, that the people who had 
been seduced by it, were glad to take refuge again 
in the stronghold of the old superstition, as the least 
of two evils. 

The highest result that reason could attain, un- 
aided by revelation, and aided by all the light and 
experience of past ages, was wrought out fairly in 
France. It was a complete triumph of skepticism. 
Every thing concerning God, and man, and the 
future was involved in utter doubt. Eeason tri- 
umphed, and ultimated in the worship of herself, 
in the form of a profligate woman. Eeason even 
doubted her own affirmations ; and only enough of 
light was left to see the darkness into which she had 
plunged. 

This the best minds of the age stated, in words 
full of true and solemn portent — words which should 
teach others to recede from the abyss into which 



WRITTE^T REYELATIOIT. 



219 



ttese skeptical philosophers looked before they 
fell.^ 

In Great Britain and America skepticism can not 

* Diderot, dying after a life of doubt and disappointment, said to 
friends that stood by his couch to close his eyes in the last sleep, "I 
am about to take a leap in the dark." 

The justly-celebrated Rousseau uttered a striking description of 
the results of skepticism, and the moral character and aim of skeptics. 
It is true to life, and true for all time — a picture of the highest pro- 
duct of reason unaided by revelation. 

He said : 

" I have consulted our philosophers, I have perused their books, 
T have examined their several opinions. I have found them all 
proud, positive, and dogmatizing, even in their pretended skepti- 
cism, knowing every thing, proving nothing, and ridiculing one an- 
other ; and this is the only point in which they concur, and in 
which they are right. Daring when they attack, they defend them- 
selves without vigor. If you consider their arguments, they have 
none but for destruction ; if you count their number, each one is re- 
duced to himself; they never unite but to dispute; to listen to 
them was not the way to relieve myself from' my doubts. I con- 
ceive that the insufficiency of the human understanding was the 
first cause of this prodigious diversity of sentiment, and that pride 
was the second. If our philosophers were able to discover truth, 
which of them would interest himself about it ? Each of them 
knows that his system is not better established than the others ; 
but he supports it because it is his own : there is not one among 
them who, coming to distinguish truth from falsehood, would not 
prefer his own error to the truth that is discovered by another. 
"Where is the philosopher who, for his own glory, would not willingly 
deceive the whole human race ? "Where is he who, in the secret of 
his heart, proposes any other object than his own distinction ? Pro- 
vided he can but raise himself above the commonalty, provided he 
can eclipse his competitor, he has reached the summit of his ambition. 
The great thing for him is to think differently from other people. 
Among believers he is an atheist, among atheists a believer. Shun, 



220 



WKITTEN" REYELATIOlSr. 



become so prevalent, because in these countries 
Christianity is better understood ; and where it does 
prevail, it will seek to attach to itself many of the 
virtues which Christianity has introduced : but the 
result of the unguided reason can in no circum- 
stances be any thing better than doubt, varied in its 
form by the diversity of the different minds that 
propagate it. Which one of the English skeptics 
agreed with another in respect to the character of 
God or human duty Who agrees with Theodore 
Parker or Joseph Barker in Am.erica? No one 
ever did or ever can. Skeptics agree in doubt, but 
they can not agree concerning the things about 
which they doubt. The effort to propound any 

shun then those who, under pretense of explaining nature, sow in 
the hearts of men the most dispiriting doctrines, whose skepticism is 
far more affirmative and dogmatical than the decided tone of their 
adversaries. Under pretense of being themselves the only people 
enhghtened, they imperiously subject us to their magisterial decis- 
ions, and would fain palm upon us for the true causes of things 
the unintelligible systems they have erected in their own heads; 
while they overturn, destroy, and trample under foot all that man- 
kind reveres, snatch from the afflicted the only comfort left them in 
their misery, from the rich and great the only curb that can restrain 
their passions ; tear from the heart all remorse of vice, all hopes of 
virtue, and still boast themselves the benefactors of mankind. 
' Trath,' they say, ' is never hurtful to man.' I believe that as well 
as they, and the same, in my opinion, is a proof that what they 
teach is not the truth." 
* See Leland and Gregory. 



TTEITTEX REVELATION. 



221 



thing positive is. in all cases, a failure ; and in most 
cases — as in Priestley's form of worship and Parker's 
philosophy of God — the effort is ridiculons as it is 
futile. The wandering mind feels the need of some- 
thing positive in religion ; and having rejected re- 
vealed truth, it seeks to attain from reason such 
baseless dogmas as Parkers ^' idea, sense, and con- 
ception of God.'' The mind of man was made to 
rest in faith ; and when skepticism deprives men of 
this support, the soul feels more of unrest and de- 
privation than do the heathen, who rest in a false 
f:iith. Unaided reason can doubt, but it can not 
affirm any thing in relation to God and the future 
that will satisfy the sonl. 

Man was not made to be the victim of skepticism. 
Heathenism is better than this, just as ignorance is 
better than aberration. Eevelation was made for 
man ; made to elevate the races progressively, from 
a state of nature to a state of grace ; made to spread 
from families to nations, and finally to reach all 
mankind. 

But leaving strictures on doubt and negation, 
i which are to positive religion as night is to the day^ 
let us look at some thoughts which may prepare us 
more intelligently to consider the positive side of 
the argument, which maintains that the Christian 

I 



222 WRITTEN REVELATION. 

Scriptures are a revelation from God^ containing tlie 
■ultimate rule of faith and duty. 

All things are progressive in their development. 
Individually or socially considered, in the life-history 
of things there is an infancy, youth, and maturity. 

First the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in 
the ear." The Scriptures affirm this principle. The 
family of man are, as a family, subject to this law. 
There are ages of infancy, of youth or tuition, and 
of maturity. The first law would be one relating 
to animal wants, and adapted to the period of child- 
hood. Hence the law, " Thou shalt not eat forbid- 
den fruit," and those of similar character. Hence 
the name of Grod as Al-Shaddi^ God of Power, or 
God of Nature, as known to the patriarchs. 

The second dispensation would be adapted to 
man's tuition in the next stage of development. 
Hence the Mosaic: which, as pictures in a child_'s 
primer, with explanations attached ; and a written 
moral law in the briefest form, gave to man a more 
perfect idea of God and of moral duties. 

The third stage would be the ultimate and per- 
fect — the full corn in the ear." 

The first stage, or patriarchal, would develop it- 
self from the family into a nation ; the second from 
the nation to all nations. 



WRITTEN REYELATIOi^T. 



223 



Men of the Christian age^ together with the knowl- 
edge of their own dispensation, get the knowledge 
generated and transmitted by the two preceding 
ones. The foundation-principles of these were de- 
veloped into the final and perfect form of Chris- 
tianity. 

The vital importance of the family — especially its 
law of duty and obedience — is developed fully in 
the first dispensation. Abraham is chosen because 
he wdll instruct and command his children (Gen. 
xviii. 19). In all ages of revelation this important 
principle needed to be understood. Families trained 
to obey righteous authority, and having their con- 
sciences and hearts nurtui^ed by the admonition and 
fear of God, are the anchor-hope of a free state. 

Man needs to know also the relation of a state, 
as a whole, to the divine government ; that every 
state has its probation; that departure from right- 
eous principle will, in the end, bring dissolution and 
disaster. This is the teaching of the national his- 
tory of Israel. It exhibits to all ages the principles 
upon w^hich God administers his govermnent over 
favored nations, and the discipline which they must 
incur for national offenses against justice and mercy. 

These three stages of development are likewise 
exhibited in individuals. There is first the animal, 



224 



WKITTEJSr REVELATION. 



when animal appetite governs. Second, the intel- 
lectual period of growth, when law and penalty 
governs. Third (for those who rise to it), a dis- 
pensation of love and fruit-bearing, when faith 
governs. 

There are likewise the lineaments of these three 
stages in the advance of each individual that enters 
the kingdom of heaven on earth. An illnstration 
is furnished in the experience of Paul. Before he 
became a Jew spirituallj^, i. e., before he apprehended 
the law as being from God, and obligatory npon his 
mind, he was free from a sense of sin ; he was sen- 
sual, governed by his own natural impulses. Sec- 
ond, when he realized the spirituality of the law, he 
became a true Pharisee ; felt condemned for sin ; 
and endeavored to escape condemnation by works 
of law. Third, he was made free by faith ; and that 
wkich before was a work of the intellect and will, 
without inward love and impulse, now became easy 
and holy^ being prompted by love which was pro- 
duced by faith in Christ. Through this process, in 
some degree, passes every individual who rises from 
nature through conviction into grace. 

Hence also the three developments of the name 
of Jehovah. Al-Shaddai^ God of nature or of power. 
Second, Jehovah. A development of the same name 



WRITTEN EE VEL ATIO.'N'. 



225 



known to the fathers (Ex. vi. 8) ; but, in the sec- 
ond dispensation, to be changed from Al-Shaddai 
to Jehovah, who now developed himself in moral 
law and tuition. In the third, Father , So7i, and 
ffohj SjJint — the God of power^ and developed by 
law and tuition into the God of grace. Thus by 
the progressive development of the divine char- 
acter, has the human mind been raised through the 
first and second, into the third and ultimate state 
of knowledge. 

With these preliminary remarks, I invite your 
attention to the following train of thought, as proof 
of the Necessity of a Written Revelation, 

I have in my published volumes discussed the de- 
tails of the statements which follow. An outline 
view will indicate the course of thought which you 
will find more fully and carefully stated in the vol- 
umes which I send you. 

Every species of nature may be cultivated. Its 
properties or faculties may be improved. This is 
true in a general sense ; and especially true as we 
rise toward the higher species. But the improve- 
ment of any species must come from one higher 
than itself. There may be choice individuals pro- 

10^ 



226 



WRITTEN REVELATION. 



duced by chance circumstances, but no sjpecies can 
raise itself fihove its natural level. 

Now, a distinguishing characteristic of man is, 
that he is both a cultivable and a cultivating being. 
He cultivates the species of nature fitted to his use, 
while he himself is capable of moral culture. 

But as it requires man's superior powers of in- 
tellect and example to cultivate the orders below 
him, and raise them above their natural condition, 
so it requires the powers of a being above man to 
elevate him, as a moral being, into a new sphere of 
thought and feeling. The conclusion, therefore, 
arises not only from the analogy but from the neces- 
sity of things, that man cultivates nature, and Christ 
cultivates man. 

But what are the means of culture adapted to 
man's nature as a moral being? There are four, 
namely, written language, faith, conscience^ and ex- 
ample. Faith and conscience are subjective sus- 
ceptibilities, and written language and example are 
objective means answering to them; And by the 
interaction of these, man may be cultivated into the 
sphere of a superior species. But the external 
means must be exercised by an agency superior to 
himself, or he will never rise above his natural 
selfish and earthly nature. 



WRITTEN REYELATIOK. 



227 



Notice the facts and tlieir application. "Written, 
or sign-language, is generally supposed to be a nat- 
ural product of the human reason. However this 
may be, it is certain that men, after they have at- 
tained a settled social condition^ always form, for 
themselves a language of signs. Without this they 
can not ascend from the first stages of barbarism. 
Fixed signs of thought are necessary before there 
can be commercial progress, forms of law, or fixed 
moral principles. 

Sign-language is one of the distinguishing char- 
acteristics of the human specie.s. Animals below 
man can communicate to each other certain ideas, 
but they can not impress upon external objects, and 
thus transmit to others, a fixed sign of their thought. 

If, then, sign-language is a characteristic of man, 
and if he can not be elevated from barbarism to 
social and civil position without it, it would be 
absurd to suppose that his moral culture can be 
accomplished without this necessary medium. 

Hence, so soon as the primitive nations became 
settled, and so soon as sign-languages were matured, 
God gave to man, in order to his moral progress, a 
written record of the past — of his character, and of 
his will; and these, together with new and progress- 
ive spiritual ideas generated by forms and external 



228 



WEITTEN REVEL ATIOK. 



types, were rendered permanent in sign-langnage, 
and transmitted to the future by the ritual dispen- 
sation of Moses. 

The second characteristic which distinguishes man 
from irrational beings, is faith. Animals receive 
their knowledge through the senses ; man receives 
most of his knowledge by credence,^ All the ex- 
perience of the past is given to him by faith in 
testimony. It is faith alone that connects man with 
the past and the future — with God and the spiritual 
world. Faith depends on written language to reach 
the past, and on hope to reach the future, and on 
written revelation to know God. Man is a believing 
being by creation ; and without faith he is no bet- 
ter than the brute — with a bad faith he is worse. 

Faith is the spiritual sense. By it spiritual ob- 
jects become subjective in the soul, as external 
physical objects become subjective by sense. By 
faith in revealed truth, the character of God be- 
comes a conscious entity in the soul. " Faith works 
by love." " He that loveth knoweth God, for God 
is love." Thus by faith the character of God, and 
the life and precepts of God recorded in divine reve- 

* There is a class of philosophers who contend that they receive 
all their knowledge through the senses. By this method men may 
approximate aiiimal natures ; but the distinguishing characteristic 
between sense and spirit can never be entirely obliterated. 



WEITTEK REVELATION. 



229 



lation, become united in the moral culture of man. 
In this way the subjective susceptibility of faith is 
met by the objective actuality of divine revelation. 

Mark, now, that without divine truth externally 
revealed, the susceptibility of faith is injurious and 
evil to man. Faith controls man's character and 
his life. If I believe my neighbor to be a bad 
man^ I will feel as though he were so. If a Catholic 
believes he ought to confess to the Virgin Mary, his 
conscience will reprove him if he does not do so. 
Faith forms man's character and his conscience in 
accordance with what the man believes, whether 
that be true or false. Faith of itself is blind ; it 
needs a guide as much as a blind man needs eyes. 
Without revealed religion as the guide of faith, 

the blind lead the blind, and both fall into the 
ditch." 

But faith is connected with conscience as well as 
with sign-language in the moral development of 
man. This brings us to the third fact in the means 
of human culture. There are two elements in ef- 
ficient faith — one the external fact, the other the 
divine authority of the fact. Conscience will re- 
spond to no truth unless faith delivers it as coming 
from God. Great souls, such as Plato, Seneca, and 
TuUy, have spoken great truths ; but who cared for 



230 



WRITTEN REVELATION. 



these? None but tliose who did not need them. 
These were men like others — ^liable to mistakes — 
could give only their opinions — ^had no authority 
over men. Their sayings, therefore, could neither 
awaken or guide the conscience. 

God has so constituted the soul, that conscience 
will enforce no truth upon the life with efficiency, 
unless it has God in it. The moment faith sees God 
in truth, that moment conscience awakes and en- 
forces it as a duty. Jesus Christ himself did not teach 
that his truth would have full reforming efficacy 
until after his resurrection. He taught that by his 
resurrection and the advent of the Spirit, the evi- 
dence of divine authority would be given to his 
truth, and then it would attain new power and ap- 
plication in the souls of men. Truth alone has no 
power with the conscience. When truth comes in 
the name of God, then conscience awakes and en- 
forces obedience. 

But mark, now. Conscience, like faith, is blind 
without a guide, and with a blind guide it is doubly 
blind. If a man believe in no God, he will have 
no conscience ia relation to any religious duty. If 
he believe his god sanctions theft, as do the devo- 
tees of Kale, he will steal. If he believe his god 
sanctions child-sacrifice, conscience will enforce the 



WRITTEN KEYELATION. 



231 



murder, even against the parental instinct. So faith, 
governs conscience, and both are false and foul 
without truth. With truth recognized as being 
only of human origin, faith is dead and conscience 
inefiicient. Hence, the triLtJi^ and not only the truth, 
but God-revealed truth — the truth of Ood in icritten 
language — is the only true guide of the soul. 

God has so constituted the soul that a written 
revelation is required in order to moral progress. 
As Grod is true, that revelation would be given. 
As God is true, that revelation has been given in 
the Christian Scriptures. A revelation of truth in 
progressive dispensations, up to the perfect in love^ 
in precept^ and in example. 

"We come now to the fourth requisite in order to 
the moral culture of man — a perfect example of hu- 
man duty. 

Theory is never perfect without example. Oliver 
Evans could not give his perfect theory of a steam- 
mill, and say to any one who understood his words 
and his plan, Go and build a mill." His common- 
sense would teach him that the practice has to be 
learned as well as the theory. The master- workman 
must take the saw and hatchet, 2Jidi practice the theory 
in the presence of the pupil^ and put the learner 
through the routine of the labor. So in all things : 



232 



WRITTEN REYELATION. 



tlieorj is only a part of knowledge ; tlie practice 
bas to be learned by example. So in religion. We 
needed not only the precept, but the example under 
the precept. This Christ has given. In the New 
Testament, Jesus is seen practicing the divine pre- 
cept, and saying to his disciples, Follow me." 

Again, example is needed not onlj^ of moral duty, 
but of the spirit in which duty is to be discharged. 
This also is given in the New Testament. 

Again, as precepts must be general in their na- 
ture, there are many specific applications of them 
which men could not know were it not for the ex- 
ample of Christ. When a son knows the character, 
and spirit, and motives of his father, he will be 
able to judge, in Ms absence^ what his father would 
do in specific cases, and hence what he would have 
him do. So the example and spirit of Christ is a 
sure guide to his disciples in applying his precepts 
to the specific duties of life. When the believing 
mind inquires^ what would Christ have me do in 
this case? the life and Spirit of Jesus, revealed in 
tke Scriptures, will guide to the rigkt conclusion. 

But, finally, and above all, in order to man's con- 
tinued progress toward the perfect, he needs an ex- 
ample that is ever above him — the example of one 
whose excellence will show him his defects, and whose 



eefor:^-is asd refoemers. 233 



love and proffered aid will invite him to higlier at- 
tainments. Faith in Christ's example induces a sense 
of un worthiness, at the same time that faith in his sac- 
rifice for us. moves the soul by love, and induces self- 
denial for others. This is the true Christian conscious- 
ness^ and highest moral condition. (Matt. xi. 28-30.) 

No one will doubt but that a sense of joresent im- 
perfection and a struggle for higher attainment in 
holinesSj is the method of moral progress. Now, at 
the entrance of the straight gate that leads to life 
stands the Saviour of men. He is ever before his 
disciples. The light of his perfect character shows 
them their defects. The love of his heart strength- 
ens and encourages by the way. The mark of the 
priz3 of their high calling is to attain the perfection 
of his character ; and to those who are running the 
race with whatever of knowledge and strength they 
possess, the divine favor and the divine providence 
are a conscious blessing and constant guard. 

Thus, my dear sir, I think it is plain that the 
Bible was made for man ; that it possesses the char- 
acteristics which are adapted to develop his moral 
faculties up to the perfect. A revealed written reve- 
lation is a necessity of man's moral nature. The 
Bible meets the necessity of the case, and therefore 
the Bible is of God. Yours truly. 



LETTER XIV. 



BEYELATION THE MOTIYE-POWER IN HUMAIsT PRO- 
CtKESS. 

My Deah Sir : — 

I did not purpose to trouble you witt an- 
other letter; but your last note brings to Yiew a 
point where I think you and many others have 
fallen into a grave misapprehension. That point is 
expressed in the paragraph quoted below. I will 
not open again the discussion in relation to those 
professing Christians whom you charge with com- 
plicity with sin. A word or two with reference to 
alleged Bible authority for slavery, and then I shall 
show — I hope conclusively — that the facts" are not 

against my logic," as you allege, but that they sus- 
tain, decisively, the views to which you seem to 
think they are opposed. 

You say : Almost thou persuadest me to believe 
a Written Kevelation necessary. But I put facts 
against logic. How happens it, if the Bible be a 
book of revealed religion, that progressive move- 



REVELATION AND HU:m:AX PROGRESS. 235 



ments are generally led by those ttLo do not hold 
your views of the Bible ? How happens it that re- 
formers have to advance against the resistance and 
denouncements of the most influential churches, 
who often justify wrong by the Bible ; as you know 
has been the case in the anti-slavery discussion in 
this country. It is true that while they defend 
slavery by the Bible, many of them profess to be 
opposed to slavery ; but in this they are either 
hypocrites or accusers of their own book : for if the 
Bible (as I think it does) sanctions the practice of 
slaveholding, they ought to defend the institution. 
By condemning it, they condemn their own Scrip- 
tures.'' 

Now, sir, I admit, as you know, to some extent, 
your allegation against the American churches ; but 
I deny its application entirely to the true church of 
Christ. It has always been the few who, in the 
martyr ages of human progress, have stood and 
achieved the victory, both against church and state ; 
but those few have stood in the light of the Bible, 
and have succeeded by the power of conscience 
strengthened by Bible feith. In relation to those 
who seek to sanction sin by the Bible, it proves 
nothing now, any more than it did in the time of 
the prophets, and of Christ. Neander, who, I be- 



236 EEVELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 

lieve, is held in higli esteem by you, somewhere 
says that men interpret the Scriptures by their own 
hearts. This is a true saying. The moral disposi- 
tion of a man will determine what use he will make 
of the Bible. 

A certain kind of servitude was no doubt ad- 
mitted by Moses. By the necessities of the Mosaic 
economy, the soil belonged to Israelites. The re- 
version land law returned the fee of the farms in 
Israel to the family of the original holder, at the 
end of each fifty years. Strangers, therefore, among 
the Jews, had to seek labor and subsistence as 
servants. Hence there was a life servitude, or a 
servitude until the Jubilee, but the Jubilee freed all 
the inhahitants of the land. Hence there could be 
no such thing (and there was no such thing) as an 
accumulation of slaves in Israel. Beside this, the 
mitigations of the law of Moses (and especially the 
law forbidding the return of fugitives) alleviated, 
even in the dispensation " which made nothing per- 
fect," the fearful rigors of the slavery which existed 
in that age. A servant, being of the same color 
with his master, if he were misused, could escape to 
Israel or from Israel, and the ^' fugitive law" (the 
opposite of ours) forbade his return. 

But the dispensation of Moses was inspired for 



IN HUMAN PEOGKESS. 



237 



that age, and for the Jews. It was only a stage of 
progress toward the perfection of the gospel. He 
is either an ignorant man or a sinner, who endeav- 
ors to justify slavery under the gospel by any 
servitude which may have existed daring the intro- 
ductory dispensation. If slavery may thus be jus- 
tified, so may polygamy. Beside, if the Bible tol- 
erates slavery, it is the slavery of poor whites, not 
of negroes. Its servitude was predicated on con- 
dition, not color. Every man, therefore, who at- 
tempts to justify slavery by the Bible, should be 
held responsible for teaching that the enslavement 
of the poor is justified by the Scriptures. 

There are those, I know, who justify American 
slavery by the New Testament. For such men, 
educated in the slave States, I could find an apology ; 
but for northern Christians who hold such senti- 
ments, argument is not the thing needed. In the 
divine government pardon or penalty is the issue 
with them. 

They tell us that Christ regulated slavery 
that he gave precepts regulating the conduct of 
the master and the slave in their several relations." 
So he regulated assault and battery, and gave pre- 
cepts that, when a man is smitten on the one cheek, 
he should turn the other. Has he, therefore, justi- 



238 REVELATIOK THE M O T I V E -PO W E R 

fied assanlt and battery ? Christ abrogated slavery 
by the golden rule — by placing all men npcm the 
platform of civil equality — ^by making it a funda- 
mental tenet of his religion that those who had 
privileges should labor to elevate others up to their 
own position ; and thus practically love their neigh- 
bor as themselves. Slavery is expressly abrogated 
in the epistle to Philemon, who is required to re- 
ceive his old servant " not now as a servant^'''' but as 
a brother man and a brother Christian. The 6th 
chapter of first Timothy you have translated rightly. 
The first verses teach as distinctly as any words can 
convey the same truth, that those servants who had 

helieving masters''' were not ^' under the yoke" of 
slavery, as were those whose masters had not re- 
ceived the gospel. Those who had not believing 
masters are exhorted to endure their affliction for 
Christ's sake ; and those who had " helieving mas- 
ters''' are exhorted (as emancipated slaves are in the 
West Indies) still to labor for their old masters, 
rather than for another ; because their master was 

now a hrother j'' and as the benefit of their labor had 
to be given to some one, it was a Christian duty to 
prefer that the believing master should receive that 
benefit. 

If they were still considered slaves in the legal 



IN HUHA^^ PROGRESS. 



239 



sense, such an exhortation to the t^vo different 
classes -^ould be absurd. Those who had believing 
masters were evidently no longer held under the 
yoke" of involuntary servitude. 

But let us pass to the main and ultimate question 
as to the facts. Has not the Bible given impulse 
and direction in every successful effort that has 
ever been made for the moral progress of man- 
kind? Let us see whether ''the facts are against 
my logic." 

The Bille itself^ as you hww^ claims that its 
mission is to enlighten the ivorld^ and to advance the 
moral interests of the human family. As this is a 
Bible topic, I can do no better than remodel for you 
a discourse recently delivered upon this particular 
subject. I ask your attention to the discriminations 
which it makes, and to the facts by which the con- 
clusion is reached. We have shown, as we think, 
that human nature is so constituted, that revealed 
religion is necessary in order to the moral develop- 
ment of our race. Do historical facts verify this 
conclusion ? 

"We have said that the Bible claims to be both 
light and power in the moral progress of the world. 
I wish you would observe this, because in some of 
your letters you speak of the orthodox party claim- 



240 REVELATION THE MOTIYE-POWEK 



ing more for the Bible than it claims for itself. 
This may be true when some eulogists of revelation 
claim for it extraordinary excellences of style, and 
other extrinsic matters of that sort. But it is not 
true in regard to the claim of moral light and power. 
The Bible does claim these^ and all friends of revela- 
tion should claim them for it. Notice this. 

The Old Testament writers speak of their own 
dispensation as the light of their age ; and the minds 
of the old prophets glow with inspiration when they 
refer to the increased light and purity of Messiah's 
age — an age when the light of the moon was to 
be as the light of the sun, and the sun itself would 
shine with sevenfold effulgence." To the people 
that sat in darkness and in the valley and the 
shadow of death," they declared that a light would 
spring up." About the last utterance of the last of 
the prophets refers to the purifying power of the 
Messiah's dispensation, and to the spiritual light 
which would be revealed in his day. (Mai. iii. 1, 
2,) ^' Behold I will send my messenger before me 
[John Baptist], and he shall prepare the way before 
me ; and the Lord [Messiah] whom ye seek shall 
suddenly come to his temple ; even the messenger 
of the covenant whom ye delight in : behold ! he 
shall come, saith the Lord of hosts ! (2) But who 



IN HUMAX PROGRESS. 



241 



may abide the day of his coming ? and who shall 
stand when he appeareth ? For he shall be like a 
refiner^ s fire and like fuller^ s soap ; and he shall sit 
as a refiner and purifier of silver, That is, the Mes- 
siah's dispensation would pnrify and elevate those 
who were subjects of its influence. And (ch. iy. 2, 
3) while the wicked would be condemned and de- 
stroyed, to those who feared the Lord the Sun of 
righteousness would arise with healing in his 
beams." 

To this light of the old dispensation the people 
who first heard the gospel, and who lived in the 
transition period (from the death of Christ to the 
fall of Jerusalem) were exhorted to take heed. 
Although it shone in a darker dispensation, yet it 
was a lamp" in the path that led to a fuller mani- 
festation of divine love and truth. This view of the 
relations of the Old and New Testament light the 
Apostle Peter beautifully expresses in his second 
letter, chap. i. 19, We have also a more sure word 
of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take 
heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place 
[age], UNTIL the day dawn, and the day-star [of the 
gospel dispensation] arise in your hearts." The 
Old Testament dispensation — as interpreted by the 

inspired prophets — was as a light in the night. The 

11 



242 reyelatio:n' the motive-power 

New Dispensation was daylight, wtiicli was then 
dawning in the hearts of believers. 

John Baptist, the forerunner of Jesus, who came 
to reprove his nation and to call them to repentance, 
as the proper preparation for the reign of Messiah, 
was called a burning and a shining light." The 
first prophetic announcement of the character of Je- 
sus, after his advent, by the pious Simeon, was that 
he should be a light to enlighten the Gentiles, and 
the glory of his people Israel," and that he would 
" be set for the fall [by repentance] and rising again 
[to a higher moral state] of many in Israel." That 
is, the Gentile nations should be enlightened by 
Christ, and " many" of the Jewish nation would 
feel condemned in the light of his dispensation, and 
would rise again into the higher moral condition 
which it required. 

John, although himself called a light, afl&rmed 
that he was not that light which was to raise a por- 
tion of the Jewish people, and enlighten the Gentile 
nations. He was not that light, but was sent to 
bear witness of that light" — that was the true 
light that enlighteneth every man that cometh into 
the world," both Jew and Gentile. 

Jesus himself claimed to be the light of the 
world." " I am," said he, come a light into the 



I^" HUMAX PROGRESS. 243 

world, that whosoever believeth in me should not 
abide in darkness." " I am the light of the world ; 
he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but 
shall have the light of life." The truth which he 
declared as the basis of condemnation was, that 
light had come into the world, and men loved the 
darkness rather than the light, because their deeds 
were evil." 

The apostles apprehended distinctly that the in- 
creased light of revelation was the reforming and 
the elevating power of the nations. They not only 
understood the fact, that revelation was the moral 
life and light of men, but they understood the rela- 
tions of this fact, and its place in the moral progress 
of the world. " The darkness," said they, " is past, 
and the time light now shineth." They speak of the 
church of Christ as the light of the world," and 
Christians as the children of the light." There is, 
probably, no other topic which suggests illustrations 
to the minds of the sacred writers more varied and 
beautiful than this one ; and there is none other 
which conveys to us truth of more vital importance. 
There is, in my opinion, no figures in human lan- 
guage more striking than those which the inspired 
writers use in presenting truth under the symbol of 
light, not only in the past and present, but in the 



244 EEYELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 

apocalyptic visions of the future. "Wbat can he 
more striking than the figures of the revelator. 
Forecasting the period of the Eeformation, he speaks 
of the two witnesses," the Okl and New Testa- 
ments, which, clothed in sackcloth, were Ijnng 
without vitality in the streets — these are elevated 
into the heavens, from which position they attract 
the attention of men, and send the rays of the Eef- 
ormation down into their hearts. The church of 
Christ, witnessing for truth, is spoken of as A 
woman, clothed with the sun^ and the moon under 
her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve 
starsJ^ 

But I need not to dwell upon the fact that the 
Scriptures do claim that the truth of revelation is 
the moral light of the world. There is another fact 
connected with this subject ; one which the cursory 
reader overlooks ; but it is one which relates to the 
vital power of truth — the Scriptures claim that there 
is spirit and life in the truth which they reveal. To 
this life of the light I ask your attention before the 
historical analysis which is to follow. It is well to 
ascertain accurately the apostolic conception, and 
the breadth of the Scripture claim, before an appeal 
to external testimony. 

To see an evil is one thing ; to lead men to feel 



IN HUMAN PKOGRESS. 



245 



the turpitude of evil, in itself, in themselves, and in 
the sight of God, is quite another thing. We have 
noticed this fact in a previous letter. It will not be 
necessary to dwell on it here. Sufl&ce it to say, 
that in order to the moral progress of men two 
things are necessary. First, that men should see the 
evil ; and second, that they should /e^Z such a sense 
of the evil as will lead them to turn from it, and 
seek a higher life. Light is necessary to see the 
evil. A sense of God and duty with that light, is 
necessary to lead men from the evils which the light 
reveals. 

Now, this reproving or convicting power accom- 
panies the light of revealed religion. There may be 
intellectual culture where there is no moral purity. 
The first benefit is scarcely a blessing without the 
last. A knowledge of right and duty only renders 
one a greater hypocrite unless he have moral sense 
and moral life sufficient to conform to his own con- 
victions. Now, this reproving power, which leads 
men to feel the evil of sins which they perceive, the 
Scriptures claim for themselves as a spiritual effi- 
cacy which accompanies revealed truth. Let us 
notice and illustrate this fact. 

We have shown elsewhere that truth has power 
over the moral nature of men, only so far as a 



246 REVELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 



sense of God and duty is in it. There needs to be 
life as well as ligTit in that truth which has reforming 
power in the world. This life-power the sacred 
Avriters claim as belonging to the gospel. It is a 
power by which men feel reproved or condemned 
for the sins which truth reveals to them^ — a power 
which leads them to reprove evils in themselves and 
others made manifest by the light." 

Christ is spoken of as being not only the " light," 
but the life" of men. The second Adam gave not 
only light to the intellect, but life to the heart. 
He was a "life-giving" as well as a " light giving" 
Spirit. " The words that I speak unto you," said 
Jesus, " they are spirit and they are life." I am 
the light of the world. He that followeth me shall 
not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of 
life^ " I am the way, the truth, and the Zy%." 
Now, this life, or reproving, or convicting power, 
is the glory of the gospel. Without this, the intel- 
lect may be enlightened, while the conscience will 
be dead and the heart corrupt. Hence Jesus said, 

Ye will not come unto me lest your deeds should 
be reproved." The one thing needful, after the 
understanding is enlightened in relation to moral 
duties, is this reproving life in the conscience of 
men, which produces "repentance unto life." The 



IN HUMAN PROGRESS. 247 

Holy Ghost is personally this reproving poiver. The 
divine Spirit gives life to tlie soul, by the truth. 
Christ taught that when the Comforter, which is the 
Holy Ghost, should come into the world; He 
would persuade — reprove — the world of sin, right- 
eousness, and judgment." 

The disciples understood that without this moral 
power, the mere intellectual light of truth w^ould 
increase sin instead of producing holiness. Hence 
they said, Christ hath made us ministers of the 
New Testament : not of the letter, but of the spirit ; 
for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." 
Paul, in his letter to the Christians at Ephesus, 
states with great distinctness the effect and the ne- 
cessity of gospel truth, both as an enlightening and 
reproving power, (v. 13) ''All things that are re- 
proved are made manifest by the light ; for whatso- 
ever doth make manifest is light : wherefore [the 
gospel] saith, Aw^ake, thou that sleepest, and arise 
from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light." 
That is, the light of revealed religion shows the 
moral evils which exist in the heart and in the 
world; and the life-power of the Spirit accompany- 
ing that light, leads us to feel the guilt of these 
evils. 

Notice, now, an instance of the influence and 



248 REVELATION THE MOTIYE-POWER 

practical operation of this moral power of triitli, as 
it effected the reformation of the world in the apos- 
tolic age. The same principle we shall see is ap- 
plicable in all other cases, and in all time. 

Take the case of the city of Ephesns, to the 
Christian inhabitants of which Paul writes the pas- 
sage we have quoted. The apostle describes this 
city as sitting in darkness, and her citizens as cor- 
rupted by the practice of the most debasing vices. 
He says to the Christians, Ye were sometime 
darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord. Walk 
as children of the light, and have no fellowship with 
the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove 
them ; for it is a shame even to speak of those things 
which are done of them in secret." Such was the 
celebrated city of Ephesus when the light and re- 
proving power of the gospel reached her. What 
was necessary in her case ? 

Intellectual light was not what the men of Ephe- 
sus wanted. They lived in the Augustan age, the 
noon-day of ancient civilization. They lived when 
the light of reason had reached its meridian in the 
ancient world. They lived in the Eclectic age, when 
the best thoughts were collected from Plato and all 
the great thinkers that had gone before. It was 
the age of Seneca and Pliny, of Tacitus, Josephus, 



11^ HUMAI^ PROGRESS. 



249 



and Plutarch, the crowning authors of the an- 
cient literature, in morals, history, science, and 
religion. 

And this city of Ephesus was one of the points in 
Asia Avhere art and letters had done all they could 
do for human culture. Diana of the Ephesians was 
one of the purest shrines at which the old world 
worshiped ; and her temple was one of the most 
magnificent structures that was ever erected and 
adorned by human hands. About the time that Paul 
wrote the passage which we have quoted, describing 
the appaUing corruption which prevailed in the city, 
Pliny, one of the wisest and most refined men of his 
age, speaks of Ephesus as one of the luminaries 
of Asia." The one considered her as full of light, 
the other looked upon her as full of darkness. Both 
views were true, according to the standard by which 
the writers formed their judgment. Pliny saw her 
as the seat of the best civilization and the highest 
culture that a people without revelation had ever 
attained. But underneath the glare of vain-glory, 
Paul saw a degree of corruption that defiled her 
very heart. She was ^' a whited sepulcher, full of 
dead men's bones." The light that was in her was 
darkness. Those who lived in it said, Behold, we 
see !" and the baptism of their sacred rites, by.which 



250 REVELATION THE MOTIYE-POWER 



they sought to purify themselves, only infected them 
with baser pollution. 

What was needed, now, in order to reform and 
save this people ? Was it civilization ? This they 
had attained in the highest degree. Was it phi- 
losophy ? Some of the most celebrated schools 
were in this city. Was it perfection of art ? The 
best models of the age, some of which still exist as 
artistic wonders for the moderns, were at Ephesus ; 
and it is recorded that the personal accomplishments 
and taste of her citizens were celebrated throughout 
surrounding regions. All these she had (as many 
cities of modern Europe have still), and yet, having 
eyes, her citizens saw not the prevailing corruption; 
and having ears, they heard not the sentence of 
condemnation written against them. 

What they needed, first of all, was light to dis- 
cern the evil nature of sin; and second, that^er- 
sonal sense of the evil which would lead them to es- 
cape from it, and endeavor to rescue others. Until 
they saw their sin and felt its evil, they could make 
no advances in moral character. 

Now, Paul affirmed in relation to these men, and 
to this subject two things — ^that whatever they saw 
to be evil in their former practice was made manifest 
to them by the moral light of the gospel, and that 



IN HUMAN PE OGRESS. 251 

whatsoever makes sin manifest, as the gospel does, 
is light. 

Once more. Notice that this state of intellectual 
culture and moral blindness was not confined to the 
old world. The same is true of the moderns. 
Our own country does not remind one of the union 
between culture and sin, as do the cities of Europe. 
Paris, with her academy, her columns, her galleries 
of painting, her statuary, her cathedrals, her phi-^ 
losophers, her oratories, her taste and fashion, her 
every thing that is deemed a mark of high intellec- 
tual culture — Paris, with all these, is the brothel of 
nations — a city where every species of moral cor- 
ruption festers and infects the inhabitants, and 
spreads moral contagion over the continent. 

I have stood in her galleries at Versailles and the 
Louvre, and felt in my soul that her models of art 
were a curse to the people. They are adapted to 
gild the memory of those who, being corrupt in 
heart and profligate in practice, are now suffering 
the hell that awaits selfish and impure minds. Their 
undraped statuary imparts the infection of the old 
world's guilt to the new. The pictures of the old 
masters, and from them down even to David, sanc- 
tify the deeds of devils under the name of kings 
and cardinals. Thus the popular mind is led to 



252 EEYELATION THE M O T I Y E -P 0 W E R 



reverence despots and evil-doers. Their popular 
religion is as impure as the orgies of Ephesus, and 
their moral corruption as great as hers. In my 
opinion, while art might lose something, progress 
and morality would gain much, if the next outbreak 
in Paris should destroy all the public galleries in 
the city. What is true of Paris, is true likewise of 
all the great cities of the continent where the people 
are without the light of revelation. Culture and 
crime prevail together, to some extent, even in 
Protestant cities ; but there is as much moral dif- 
ference between the Protestant cities of Geneva and 
Aberdeen on the one hand, and Florence and Naples 
on the other, as there is between daylight and dark- 
ness. 

Intellectual culture without Christian culture, is 
a painted harlot, who lives in moral night ; and, 
decorated in the tinsel of art and letters, allures the 
weak and the wicked to hell. Were there no hope 
for mankind but that which art, letters, and intel- 
lectual culture produces, despotism and darkness 
would reign over the earth, and the hope of moral 
progress, of human freedom, and human happiness, 
might be abandoned forever. Men might be as 
cultivated as was Eobespierre, and yet become as 
dark-minded and as desperate as he. They might be 



11^ HUMA^^ PROGRESS. 



253 



as polished externally as was Dr. Webster, while yet 
internally tliey might be as wicked. John ISTewton 
had the same mind and the same intellectual culture 
when engaged in the slave-trade, that he afterward 
possessed when his muse charmed and purified the 
hearts of all those who listened to him. 

In many and striking forms Christ taught men 
the difference between intellectual and Christian 
culture. The one without the other is the whited 
sepulcher" — " the hidden grave" — the darkness or 

night" of the soul. The one pertains to man's 
moral nature — ^his affections and his conscience — 
the other to his intelligence. The one without the 
other engenders selfishness and hypocrisy ; but in- 
tellectual culture, used and sanctified by a living 
conscience and pure affections, secures all human 
good to its possessor, and leads him to labor for 
the good of the world. When the intellect moves 
to the work of human elevation, the power which 
gives the impulse and secures permanency, is gen- 
erated in the heart and conscience. Men with in- 
tellectual light alone may make advances without 
moral principles, as they have done often in France, 
South America, and elsewhere ; but without moral 
principle, which gospel faith produces, permanent 
progress is impossible. 



254 REVELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 

"With these principles and discriminations in mind, 
I now proceed to show that all human progress, both 
ancient and modern, has its origin in the truth and 
power of revealed religion ; and that without this 
the hope of reform is fallacious, and if progress were 
attained, it could not be peimanent. 

It is a historical fact which has not been suffi- 
ciently noticed, that human nature is always below 
revelation. This fact indicates the divine origin of 
revelation. Great discoveries are usually the pro- 
duct of preceding ages of thought. One mind de- 
velops the idea ; but it is the fruitage of the age 
ripened in that mind. A pearl is found ; but the 
location had been indicated by previous researches. 
But revealed religion is something different from 
this. It is separate from and superior to the thought 
of the age. It calls the wisdom of the world fool- 
ishness, and introduces a new stand-point and start- 
ing-point, around which it gathers what was valu- 
able in the old, and destroys the remainder. Hence 
it will always be found true that a struggle is necessary 
to bring up the human mind and keep it up to the 
level of revealed religion, and that revealed religion 
produces that struggle. The human mind naturally 
falls below it ; hence frequent struggles are neces- 
sary to restore it from its relapses. Even those who 



IK HUMAN PEOGRESS. 



255 



profess to be the friends of the dispensation, retro- 
grade so soon as its power is in any wise abated ; 
and new applications of the same poicer have to be 
made to rescue them, and bring them np again 
nearer to the requirements of their dispensation. 

No one will doubt but that the theology of 
Moses was antagonistic to that of Egypt, and to 
that of all the nations with which the Israelites had 
intercourse. Its great aim was to destroy idolatry, 
to remove physical and moral impurities, and estab- 
lish the worship of the one true God, Jehovah. 
But the Jews (although all their traditions were in 
favor of monotheism, and all their experiences such 
as were adapted to drive them from idolatry) were 
constantly falling into the vices and idolatries of sur- 
rounding nations. Their history is a record of sad 
departures from the purity of the Mosaic economy. 

Now, the question is, by what means was the ad- 
vanced system maintained and reformation produced, 
when the people had again dropped down to their 
natural level? We answer, by the power of re- 
vealed truth, and by this alone. Whatsoever was 
reproved in Israel, was made manifest by the light," 
' and whatsoever does make manifest is light." 

Their defections were shown to them by referring 
them to the light of the law of Moses. This alone 

I 



256 REVELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 

conld show them the evil of polytheism, for no 
other system existed in the world that did not favor 
the evil. The evil being revealed hy the law, they 
were reproved out of the same law for departing from 
its requirements, and in this way alone reformations 
were produced. The instances of reformation by 
the light and power of the revealed religion I need 
not to enumerate, especially to you. The relapses 
were all recovered, and the nation finally delivered 
from all disposition to idolatry, by the Bible, and 
by the providence of God working in harmony with 
the dispensation — punishing departures and encour- 
aging reform. 

When the nation was almost lost in the surround- 
ing darkness, the Eeformation under Josiah was 
produced by the law alone. The Book" found — 
as Luther found it afterwards in the convent — was 
the light and power of the rescue. 

In the later periods of the dispensation, the old 
prophets stood up in the solemn grandeur of their 
mission, to reprove the rulers and the people, and 
restore them to obedience to the law. The voices 
of Jeremiah, of Isaiah and Ezekiel, are heard in 
tones of sorrow, instruction, and reproof, reverberat- 
ing through the nation. They held aloft the law, 
and showed to the people that the judgments of God 



IIs^ HUMAX PEOGRESS. 



257 



would come, or had come, upon them for departing 
from it. They gave the law .a spiritual import in 
advance of what it had before [a characteristic of 
the true preacher] ; they enforced it by the authority 
of God ; and spoke almost with the tongue of an 
evangelist of a future Messiah. Thus, in the light 
of the law they reproved in the name of God : and 
if reformation was not produced, they led the people 
to feel that judgment came upon them for disobe- 
dience ; and thus their captivities and sufferings 
tended finally to cure their errors. 

Now, I need not say to you, what you know, that 
by this process, and this alone, was the worship of 
one God at length established in the world. By the 
law of Moses, and the administration of the reprov- 
ing prophets, the thing was accomplished, and in no 
other way. Thus the law was a schoolmaster to 
bring us to Christ. When the evil of idolatry was 
cured, and ideas of the Messiah created by the Mo- 
saic ritual, the world was prepared for a higher 
dispensation. 

One other topic here is worthy of notice. It is a 
part of the history of monotheism that has not been 
suflS.ciently studied. I allude to the history of the 
Arabians, as it connects itself with the Old Testa- 
ment on the one side, and with Islamism on the 



'^^S K K V K I. A V ION Til K M O T 1 V K ■ I' (> W K K 

olluM*. Tlu^ Ai';ibs c'lami Abrnliam, Urst it- 

toriuiM- vW" tlu* worKl, ;is lluMi' lalluM'. Islimiu'l was 
tlu^ s(>n of tlir laduM- of 1 Iir Ihil lil'iil ; but liis sou Uy 
n (pm.'Mi w ifr; \ci io Islmiarl also was pi'iMiiiso 
ifiNiMi, that lu^ slioiilil iiilicMal luit in an iiiCrrior 
(K\i.M\\^ t ho Mossiii!*; ol" Abi-aliaiii. ( )(.Ium* drscriul- 
aiils oi' Abi-ahaiu \voi\^ iniii!';Kul iii Mimu^i, roiisliliil.- 
lUi^ (wo linos of tho AlMalianiu" famiU' llio Arabic- 
aiul i\\c tlowisli. ^V\\c\ lia\o (ho saino i-ohitioii (o 
(ho (riio roli\;ioii (hat. (ho (wo sons ha\'o io Ahra- 
liani, or Msaii aiul Jaooh (o Isaao. 4'hri>ii«';h thc^ 
Iruo so.i oonios (ho (rno i\ospol ; (ho o(hcM' is a. dc- 
i;roo ronioN'Oi! trom i(. Wwi (ho l'ao( is, thai l)o(h 
linos roooi^nii'.o aiul worship (ho sanu* oiu^ Cxod : 
iVoin both ori^^^imUo (ho ro(brniors oC idohUrw ^V\\o 
Arabs aro now, in (his rospoo(, n.boii(. whoro (ho 
»K^ws woro bolbro {\\c ooiniin^- of (^hris(. 'riu^\ , like 
(ho Jow s, ha.\ o ('ro(|iion( I \- vola[>sO(l in(o (ho idolatry 
anil \ ioos o('siirroniurinL\" na( ions ; \ o( bolbro Mohaiii- 
mod (horo woro nianv ro(brinors who i\\s(or(.\l mono- 
(hoisni in somo oi' (ho (ribos. Uwl (ho poin(s at 
whloh (his his(or\- oomuH'(s i(soll' wi(h onr snbjoot 
aro, (n's(, (ho MohamnuHlans aro inono(hois(s ; soc'- 
oiul, {\\('\ worship Joho\ah, (hoiuul oC Abraham 
aiul ^K>sos ; (bird, mark i(, f/iis njornnidon (if (he 
Arah'utii frilhs, irhich restored i/h' icors/np f/w one 



IN HUMAN PROGRESS. 259 

God^ was effected hy Mohammed through the light and 
jjower of the fjatriarehal and Mosaic dispensations. 
The truth which the prophet uses to kill idolatry is 
drawn from the history of Abraham and the pre- 
cepts of Moses. The 14th chapter of the Koran is 
entitled Abraham." The patriarch is introduced 
as praying for the suppression of idolatry — Keep 
me and my children from the worship of idols ; they 
have seduced part of the people." The authority of 
Moses is likewise recognized, and he is frequently 
introduced as denouncing idolatry and commanding 
the worship of Jehovah. 

Thus, the evidence is palpable and incontrovert- 
ible, that the worship of one God revealed in the 
Old Testament Scriptures, has been the reforming 
power of the whole world, so far as man is rescued 
from idolatry. The two branches of the Abrahamic 
family have done the work. Mohammedans are 
now, in this one respect, where the Jews were be- 
fore Christ, and where the unbelieving Jews are 
still. All that they have in advance of heathen 
polytheism is by the revealed religion of the Old 
Testament, and the authority of Jehovah as there 
revealed. All that we have in advance of them 
starts from this point. This brings us to the gos- 
pel dispensation — the ^Urue light that now shineihj^ 



260 EEVELATION" THE MOTIVE POWER 

The propliets of tlie old dispensation, as we have 
noticed, liad foretold the sevenfold light of the Mes- 
sianic age. The last prophetic utterance (Mai. iii. 
l-~4) announces that Christ would send his messen- 
ger (John Baptist) before him ; that he would sud- 
denly come in his temple ; bat that his dispensation 
would be a5 a refiner's fire''' — a moral power, puri- 
fying the world and the church. 

John Baptist came, and affirming that the king- 
dom, of heaven was at hand, he called the nation 
to repentance; thus practically promulgating the 
truth that reformation was necessary in order to 
enter the Messiah's kingdom. This was the burden 
of his baptism — The axe is laid at the root of 
the tree." The separating fan is in the hand of 
the Messiah. He will separate the chaff from the 
wheat — gather the wheat into his garner, and burn 
the chaff with unquenchable fire. 

Jesus came, preaching reformation and a higher 
life. He denounced the traditions of the Jewish 
teachers. He selected men without literary or 
philosophical attainment. He imbued them with a 
new spirit, and with power from on high ; and com- 
missioned them to revolutionise all forms of power 
in church and state ; promising divine aid and su- 
pervision until the work should be accomplished. 



II^" HUMAX PROGEESS. 



261 



Yon know the resnlt. Yon know the straggle 
and the snccess of the trath in the apostolic age. 
As it was in Ephesns, so it was in other cities. 
TThen Jesns died, the old world had its greatest 
intellectual light, and its greatest moral darkness. 
The truth and power of the gospel was a purifying 
element, reforming and elevating out of the mass of 
corruption a large company of the men of that 
age. 

Iq establishing a new system, with new powers 
and principles, the agency of the Divine Author 
must be interposed, of course ; just as every new 
geological advance requires divine interposition. 
But as human nature is always below the revealed 
religion which is designed to reform and elevate it, 
the corrupt age, and the dark ages which followed, 
were a natural sequence. The last of the apostles 
was not in his grave, and the visible power which 
established the New Testament had scarcely sub- 
sided, before humanity lapsed into error. To the 
light of the apostolic age there succeeded clouds, 
darkened by depravity and tinged by superstition. 
I When earthly power could not subdue the church, 
it allied itself with her, and thus corrupted her 
truth ; and from the period of the adulterous union 
between church and state the light of truth waned 



262 KEY ELATION THE MOTIVE -POWER 



into the total eclipse of the dark ages — ages without 
a Bible. 

But out of the darkness a light sprung up which 
has shone more and more down to our day. Now, 
our last inquiry is, Has revealed religion been the 
source and the power of reformation and moral pro- 
gress in the world, under the Christian dispensation, 
and from the dark ages until now? 

We need not inquire concerning the causes which, 
immediately introduced the dark ages. Sufl&ce it 
to say, that during the period from the sixth to the 
fifteenth century, the light of revelation was vailed. 
The Scriptures were no longer in the vernacular 
tongue of the people. Both church and state were 
without a Bible. The dawn of reformation begins 
with Wicklif and Huss. Their translations and 
preaching ante-date the art of printing, and the 
other great inventions of the fifteenth century. The 
art of printing no doubt greatly aided the Eeforma- 
tion. But printing in itself has no reformatory 
moral power in it. "Whether it advances or retards 
the civil and moral progress of men depends on the 
things printed. The enemies of the Reformation 
used the press as freely as the reformers. Tlie 
press infected the continent with atheism in the days 
of Voltaire, and the press strengthened the power 



IS HUMAX PEOGEESS. 



263 



of despotism under Eobespierre. The press can do 
no more tlian disseminate the thought of the age, 
whether that be bad or good. Truth is stronger 
than error ; hence the press is an auxiliary in the 
world's enlightenment. But light without moral 
principle has no real reformatory power. It does 
not create conscience, and hence wants the element 
of permanent moral progress. 

Luther is identified as the man of the Reformation. 
Whence did Luther draw his power? A benighted 
monk, he found a copy of the Bible in the convent 
of Erfiirth. The Bible enlightened Luther. He 
translated it into the vernacular tongue of his country, 
and it enlightened the people. Every shaft that the 
reformers hurled at the Papal demon was drawn 
from the Bible. Nine tenths of the literature of 
the Eeformation was biblical. That the Bible made 
the reformers is as true as that the reformers pro- 
duced the Eeformation ly the same means. About 
the facts in the case there can be no controversy. 
The dark ages were dissipated, and the Eeformation 
accomplished by the light and power of revealed 
religion. 

You have, no doubt, read the recently -published 
history of the Dutch Eepublic, by Motley. If you 
have not, get it at once. It will give you the de- 



264 EEYELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 

tailed statement of the struggle between the Bible 
power and the Papal devil in the Netherlands — a 
struggle, the successful issue of which placed Hol- 
land in the forefront of the civilization of the age, 
furnished an asylum for the persecuted in other na- 
tions, and developed a degree of moral progress 
greatly in advance of the times. That the Bible 
power achieved this moral victory for humanity, 
freedom and religion can not be questioned. 

It is conceded that the basis for the Eeformation 
in England was laid by Tindall's translation. Be- 
side this, during the struggle in the Netherlands, 
multitudes of the persecuted fled to England, and 
carried the seeds of Bible truth with them across the 
Channel. Thus was begun the progress that was ren- 
dered permanent by the translation under King James. 

Another stage of progress in civil and religious 
freedom was initiated by the Puritans. To them it 
is conceded, even by Macau! ay, that England owes 
all that places her in advance of other Protestant 
nations of Europe. To them, and the Scotch and 
Dutch Puritans, we owe all of religious libertj^ that 
we possess in America. And yet who dare deny 
that all these stages of progress were gained by the 
Bible power ? The questions of those ages of pro- 
gress were Bible questions. The conscience that 



IN Hr:MAX PROG-EESS. 



265 



strengtliened true moral heroes to endure aad to 
triumpli Tvas Bible-made conscience. The issues 
between them and their opponents were Bible is- 
sues. Luther's moving issue was justification by 
faith against the error of justification by penance 
and indulgences. The Dutch and the Scotch fought 
against the pov/ers of darkness, and triumphed under 
the same banner. The Puritans inscribed on their 
banner Bible faith and practice against forms." 
The pure Bible was their watchword. Wesley's 
Eeformation was purely religious, but, like preceding 
advances, it was founded on Bible principle — expe- 
rience against profession. So the principle of Penn 
was non-conformity to the world, against a worldly 
church. But more than all, it was Bible faith which 
gave strength of heart and conscience and will to 
these reformers ; so that they braved dangers, suf- 
fered persecutions, subdued the wilderness, and 
achieved all the civil and religious progress which 
the world possesses. 

This historic analysis might be run through all 
the details of human progress. So far as the hu- 
man families have advanced in moral culture, with 
its concomitant blessings of civil liberty and social 
comfort, that advance has been achieved — even in 

limited localities — by Bible light and power. 

12 



266 EEVELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 



But this long letter must be closed. Take an 
epitome of instances and illustrations. 

In my school-days we had a map in our geo- 
graphies which gave us an apprehension of the de- 
gree of civilization existing in different countries of 
the globe. Those regions which were the most ad- 
vanced in civil and moral culture, were light ; the 
utterly pagan regions were black; those regions 
partially civilized were partially radiated. Now, 
upon that map, which I took pains to inquire for 
and examine very recently, the degree of national 
enlightenment corresponds precisely with the amount 
of Bible knowledge prevalent among the people. 
There is no exception to this. It is universal over 
the whole earth. The Bible is the light and life of 
the moral world, just as distinctly as the sun is the 
light and life of the physical world. 

The local illustrations of this fact are striking. 
I have had the privilege, in various portions of the 
old and new world, of noticing evidences that have 
left lasting impressions on my heart. Allow me, in 
conclusion, to give you a transcript of these im- 
pressions. 

Various states of Germany contain a mixed popu- 
tion— some Protestant, some Papal inhabitants. 
Now, just in proportion to the Protestant element 



IN HUMAN PROGRESS. 



267 



does moral progress and civil liberty exist. Take 
Belgium as the starting-point. Travel up the Eliine 
and through the German states toward Eome^ and 
the amount of progress can be gaged accurately by 
the amount of Bible knowledge among the people. 
As you approach Eome, the seat of Papal power 
and superstition, the darkness can be felt. There 
the Bible is totally withheld from the masses, and 
the despotism of the rulers, and the degradation of 
the people, and the superstition of the whole, are 
almost equal to that of Central Asia ; while vice and 
crime are more prevalent than they are in Central 
Africa. 

Pass from Paris — at the same time the Athens 
and the Sodom of the continent — to Geneva, and 
thence to the Sardinian Alps. 

Bible-reading Protestants preponderate in Swit- 
zerland ; hence civil freedom prevails, and there is 
piety and probity among the peasantry, which con- 
trasts favorably with the Catholic French. But in 
passing from Geneva, by Lake Leman to Chamouni, 
you pass from the Protestant canton Yaud into the 
Catholic canton Yalais. Here moral night follows 
day without an intervening twilight. The dress, the 
physiognomy, the habits of the people change at 
once. In one you meet no beggars. In the other 



268 REVELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 

the road is thronged with them. In both, the peas- 
ants are poor ; but in one there are evidences of 
honest industry, and you meet open, frank counte- 
nances ; in the other poverty, with uncouth garments 
and sinister aspect. The more broken character of 
the country may have something to do with this ; 
but the Bible power makes a difference that can be 
felt by the traveler. 

Pass with me, now, through Scotland and Ireland. 
Scotland has one curse in common with Ireland — 
the habit of using ardent spirits prevalent among all 
classes. But apart from this, the peasantry are equal 
to any in Europe. In the cities of Edinburg and 
Glasgow there is a degree of poverty and vice in 
some of the poorer streets (as in High and Cow- 
gate streets, Edinburg) which is revolting. I saw 
nothing like it in Aberdeen. On inquiring of an 
intelligent gentleman the reasons of the phenome- 
non, he said most of the mass of depravity accumu- 
lated in these pens was made up of Irish Catholics 
and similar elements ; and that scarcely any of it 
originated with the Bible-reading population of the 
country. 

Pass from Glasgow to Belfast, in Ireland ; and 
from Belfast through, Dublin to the south of the 
island. In this journey, as you leave the Bible- 



HU:\IAX PEOGRESS. 



269 



reading north, and pass to the Catholic south, you 
pass from light and morals into the heart of one of 
the most degraded and superstitions regions that 
there is in Europe. Perhaps, after the masses of 
Eome and Naples, there is none more so in Chris- 
tendom. 

Now, sir, look with me, a moment, over the dif- 
ferent sections of our own country. You will agree 
with me that the most intelligent and moral popu- 
lation of the world, take them en masse^ is in that 
portion of the Union where the people are most 
generally instructed in the Bible principle and pre- 
cept ; while in other sections of our land vice and 
ignorance prevail just in proportion as the peo- 
ple are deprived of the Bible ; or in proportion as 
they suppress Bible truth in professedly Christian 
churches. In the one section principles and practices 
are maintained that would have appalled the men 
of the same section twenty years ago. In the other, 
I hope the light is advancing. 

It is likewise true that all the moral reforms for 
which our land is distinguished, so far as they have 
succeeded, have been initiated and advanced by the 
Bible light and power in the hearts and consciences 
of reformers. The temperance movement began in 
the church ; and the process of enlightenment was 



270 KEYELATION THE MOTIVE-POWER 



carried forward almost exclusively hj Christians. 
Search the record, and you will find that the im- 
pulse and the direction were both given by Bible 
readers. I know the final appeal has been to leg- 
islation ; but legislation can do nothing until suflS.- 
cient light is disseminated and sufficient conscience 
produced in relation to the evil to be reformed. 
Our legislation, in some States, has gone in advance 
of the moral sentiment of the masses, and reaction 
has ensued ; and the reform will never become prev- 
alent until the light and moral power of the Bible 
produce sufficient conscience to sustain it. There 
only is the moral principle that creates perseverance 
— there the benevolence that prompts to persistent 
self-denial for human good. 

So in relation to the anti-slavery reform. In En- 
gland, the Christian sentiment of the nation began, 
carried forward, and consummated the work of 
emancipation. In this country, the first fifteen years 
were spent entirely in moral endeavor by Bible 
men. It is true that a large portion of the churches 
withheld their influence, especially those churches 
rendered conservative by wealth, or connection w^ith 
the sin ; but after all, it is true that in every region 
of the free States where the reform was urged per- 
Beveringly, and one advance after another secured, 



IX hu:m:ax pe ogress. 



2T1 



in every such instance, it Trill be found that tlie 
Bible power was the impulse, and Christians the 
agents in the work. There are parties who claim to 
be anti-slavery men, par excellence^ of whom this can 
not be said ; but these are self-elated and impracti- 
cable parties, united by idiosyncrasies, and utterly 
infeasible in their aims, as they are uncharitable in 
their spirit. 

But, enough. I appeal to you, my dear sir, 
whether the idea that human progress can be 
achieved without the Bible be not a fallacy, branded 
as such both by the principles developed in the pre- 
ceding letter, and by the historical statements and 
illustrations of the present one ? My logic, as you 
were pleased to call it, is verified b\' the facts of 
history. Eevealed religion is the Alpha and the 
Omega of human progress. 

Yours, my dear sir, for that light which makes 
evil manifest, reproves it when made manifest, and 
thus abates it in the world. 



J. B. W. 



APPENDIX. 



EXTRACT PROM THE XEW EXGLiJs^DER OF MAT, 1856. 

Our previous article* refers the whole question of man's im- 
mortality to the ^-ill of God. An argument from nature is only 
our inference of that will from the disclosures of Grod in the 
material universe and in the consciousness of the human souL 
In these, and especially in the latter, we find evidence of a God 
of wisdom, justice, and goodness. From these attributes the 
inference is irresistible, to a divine will, ordaining endless ex- 
istence to all to whom such an existence would be an endless 
progress in virtue and bhss. But in regard to those irrevocably 
moving toward an opposite moral destiny, the voice of nature, 
though unmistakably predicting 2^ future life as a necessity of 
divine justice and moral government, seems to some not so 
explicitly to assure immortahty. Contrawise, rather, the very 
attributes of the Godhead, which guaranty to the good an 
everlasting being, might be regarded as necessarily dooming the 
wicked to ultimate annihilation ; or at least as creating, in be- 
half of that doctrine, so strong a presumption as to be entitled 
materially to modify and control our interpretation of the Scrip- 
tures. 

Our argument thus far has been engaged in combating such 
a presumption ; in showing the insuffi.ciency of the grounds and 
the invalidity of the assumptions on which it rests ; and that 



* New Englander, Feb., 1856. 
12* 



274 



APPENDIX. 



our ignorance of the moral system and economy under whicli 
we now are, ill entitles us to dogmatize in regard to that which 
is to be. The very same difficulties and mysteries embarrass 
the existence of evil in the present world that are supposed to 
forbid its existence in the eternal future,* and they require, as 
far as we can see, that the wicked should never have been at 
all, not less than that they should forever cease to be. Our ig- 
norance of the law or principle which underhes the origin and 
continuance of evil, makes us incompetent to limit its scope and 
duration. But reasoning from the analogy of nature, we should 
infer from its existence, spite of seeming mysteries and difi&cul- 
ties, its not improbable co-existence with them hereafter. 

Still there are minds in our times — minds, too, which we re- 
spect for sagacity, erudition, and piety — that do take this term 
of doom in another sense. We raise no question of their candor 
or sincerity, but we can not resist the impression that with them, 
though without their consciousness, natural theology is father 
to revealed ; and that philosophy and prejudgment of what the 
word of Grod must teach, have much to do with their interpret- 
ing what it does teach. They contend that everlasting punish- 
ment means, or at least is compatible with, annihilation. They 
maintain that everlasting punishment^ even if everlasting be taken 
in the sense of endless, which they affirm can be questioned, 
does not of necessity im^lj everlasting existence; that its import 
may be satisfied by a punishment whose effects are everlasting, 
i. e., one from which there shall be no recovery. 

They claim, moreover, that such a limitation of the term is 
necessary to reconcile it with other Scripture, where words sig- 
nificant of utter and total extinction of being are applied to the 
future destiny of the wicked, such as death, destruction, " ever- 
lasting destruction/^ perishing, perdition, and the like. They 

* This is at least a doubtful statement. The past is^ in all the series 
below man, a progressive system — the higher types being advanced, 
while those unfitted for new and better conditions are not restored 
but destroyed. 



APPENDIX. 



275 



tell us, moreover, that Jesus Christ is presented in the Scrip- 
tures as the author of life ; and that eternal hfe — ^by which they 
understand eternal existence — is promised by him to those only 
who believe in him ; while death, or the negation of existence, 
is denounced as the doom of those who believe not ; and, more- 
over, that the agent or instrument of future punishment, fire^'' 
is one whose nature is to consume, not conserve in pain, so that, 
whether it is to be interpreted figuratively or literally, it is evi- 
dently designed to convey the idea of the utter destruction of 
its victim. Such are the grounds, philological and exegetical, 
upon which the argument for annihilation is defended, and on 
which, presumptions from nature being abandoned, it must be 
sustained, if at all. 

JSTow the simple question before us, we premise here, is, What 
is a fair interpretation of language ? Not, what is suitable to 
our notions of Grod's nature or government ; or what may arm 
the gospel with the most powerful incentives ; or what may 
seem to us most safe or expedient to promulgate ; or what most 
enhances the value of the soul. Such considerations we discard 
as alien to our present inquiry, and tending only to perturb the 
mind with influences having no connection with evidences of 
truth or falsehood. It is not ours, in determining a question of 
divine doctrine, to inquire after what is safe or prudent to be 
taught, or what is requisite to give motive power to the gospel, 
or dignity to the human soul. These questions are God's ; 
and we best seek their solution when we inquire, what is truth ? 
what is G-od's teaching and God's arrangement ? Let us not 
presume to be wiser than God, or to understand better than he 
the true forces of the gospel. Nor, again, let us permit the 
logical and philological im^port of language to be overruled by 
our fears for God's honor, or the integrity of his wisdom, justice, 
and benevolence. God will care for his own honor, and he 
knows perfectly what is congruous with his wisdom, justice, and 
goodness. God hath spoken I we have to do, simply, with the 
inquiry, What hath he said ? God hath spoken to man. He 



276 



APPENDIX. 



has spoken, then, according to the laws of human language, and 
is to be interpreted according to the laws of human speech. 
The question before us now, let us bear in mind, then, is not 
one of philosophy, but purely of criticism, philologic and exe- 
getical. It bears through awful deeps, it is true, but they are 
deeps beyond our pliilosophic soundings ; and there is the more 
need, manifestly, that we follow, in childlike trust and simphcity, 
the divine voice. 

Our present argument claims, that approached and interpreted 
in this spirit, the Scriptures do teach the immortal existence of 
the wicked, by direct, dehberate, formal declarations, as well as 
by implication, in numerous passages ; and that the words and 
phrases alleged to convey a contrary doctrine, are, when appHed 
to the soul, not only susceptible of a Hmitation and modification 
of import Avhich may avoid such contradiction, but are actually 
employed in the familiar and constant usage of the Scriptures, 
in such application, with such Hmitation and modification of 
meaning. It claims, moreover, that those terms which, apphed 
to the body, denote dissolution and destruction, find, when pred- 
icated of the soul, their analogy most perfectly met, and have 
an especial appositeness of significancy in indicating spiritual 
ruin ; that they are actually in common use in the Scriptures, 
without denoting extinction of being, but with the unquestion- 
able significancy of a spiritual corruption ; and that the mind at 
once recognizes the fitness of the usage, and feels that the im- 
port of the terms is satisfied, and the analogy of signification, 
required in the apphcation to the soul, is fully met in such usage. 
They can, therefore, thus interpreted, be reconciled with the di- 
rect, obvious import of the passages declarative of the future 
doom of the wicked, without doing any violence to lang-uage ; 
whereas the contrary process — controlhng the direct, explicit, 
and declarative, by the indirect, the allusive, incidental, and in- 
ferential — violates a common canon of interpretation. 



APPENDIX. 



277 



RULIXG- TEXTS. 



Let us now examine some of those passages of Scriptm'e that 
may seem entitled to be regarded as ruling texts on this ques- 
tion ; that is, those that with the most dehberateness, distinct- 
ness, and solemn formality, set forth the process of final judg- 
ment ; or with the most fullness and explicitness characterize 
the future doom of the lost. And first, perhaps, among these, 
the judgment scene in the 2oth chapter of Matthew, demands 
our attention, as entitled, because of its calm, dehberate, didac- 
tic character, and its freedom from the excitements and coloring 
of imagination or passion, as well as its gxeater explicitness and 
fullness, to rank among the leading passages — the loci classici'^ 
of Scripture — on the theme of human destiny. The imagery 
employed is purely for the purpose of instruction and elucidation, 
not rhetorical or emotive. The spirit pervading it coheres with 
the time and scene. It is a case where he, who is himself to 
be the future Judge, sitting on the brow of Olivet, in secluded 
and calm converse with the disciples, who are waiting to receive 
from his lips the word, that they may proclaim it through ages, 
sets forth the process and sentence of the last judgment, and 
the separate destinies of the two gTeat moral divisions of our 
race. The shadows of the hastening crucifixion are falling 
around the speaker. Life is entering the solemnity of its last 
hour. Tlie theme, the speaker, the time, the scene — all are 
above poetry, above passion ; too awful for rhetoric ; all belong 
to severe reason and pure truth. "Word and phrase now mean 
all they utter. Xo abatement is required for amplification or 
embelhshment, for enthusiasm or fanaticism. Terrible as they 
are, still we must regard them as dispassionate and severely 
true, even as the doom they utter, belonging, if ever did words 
uttered in this world, to the intensely, utterly, eternally real 
Let us so interpret them. They present before us the judgment 
scene as connecting, in the divine government, two eternities ; 



278 



APPENDIX. 



and with its double aspect toward the everlasting. The Son of 
man has come in his glory ; before him are gathered all nations ; 
the division is made, and sentence and execution thus proceed. 

Then sliaU the King say to those on his right hand, Come, ye 
blessed of my Father ! inherit the kingdom prepared for you 
before the foundation of the world." * * * And then 
shall the King say also to those on the left hand, Depart, ye 
cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his an- 
gels."* And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, 
and the righteous into life eternal" t — or everlasting ; the epithet 
in the original is the same as that just applied to the punish- 
ment. 

Such is Jesus Christ's statement of the final destiny of man. 
It is final; there is nothing beyond — no reappearance or re- 
adjudication. From that judgment scene they pass to return no 
more. They disappear in the unapproachable hght, or the im- 
penetrable darkness. One would at first suppose the words of 
Christ in this case were so explicit and positive in .assertion of 
the immortahty of man — good or evil — that they could not be 
made more so ; that the hermeneutics that could evade them 
would defy any grasp of hmman language. But stiU, as their 
import has been questioned, let us aim to develop it in formal 
propositions. Now, no one will dispute that a text asserts the 
immortahty of the wicked, if the three following propositions can 
be estabhshed in regard to it : 

1st. It describes the doom of the wicked after death, 
2d. It predicates of that doom eternal duration. 
3d. That doom implies the continued existence of its suhject. 
Let us apply these propositions to the above passage : 
First, The passage relates to the doom of the wicked 
AFTER DEATH. This is Unquestionable. The scene is the last 
judgment ; the sentence, the final reward ; the history, the last 
disclosed in the empire of God. 



* Matt., zxv., 34-41. 



t Ibid , 46. 



APPENDIX. 



279 



Second, The doom affirmed of them is of eternal dura- 
tion. The adjective of time used asserts this ; it is the one 
that would naturally have been employed to express that idea. 
It answers in import and usage to its English representative 
eternal and everlasting. By its probable etymology {aiuvLoc al6v, 
del,) it denotes the always-befn'o, or ever-bels'G ; its radix 
being the adverb of perpetuity, or continuance. In actual usage, 
it regularly carries, in all its modifications, the sense of time 
unlimit-ed if not iUimitahle. It is the proper adjective of eter- 
nity, so much so, that in common usage of the Scriptures it is 
apphed characteristically to Qod, signifying his eternity.* The 
original Greek had no stronger epithet of duration. It is true 
that, hke its EngUsh representatives, it is sometimes attached to 
objects of a measurable date. But such usage belongs to rhe- 
torical and poetic diction, or to the language of imagination and 
passion, or appears with obvious hmitations in the nature or re- 
lations of the subject to which it attaches ; (as, e. g., everlasting 
hills ; everlasting statutes, etc.). Such cases, however, indicate 
and explain themselves. Apart from such diction and limitation, 
expressed or impUed, the term, of its own proper force, carries 
the idea of eternal duration. But in this text is no such dic- 
tion ; nor is there any such hmitation, unless in the nature of 
the soul, to suppose which, begs the entire question by assum- 
ing the very point at issue, or in some popular notion of the 
soul's mortahty, prevalent at the time — ^but such notions did not 
prevail among those to whom Christ spake. 

For again, amid the strongest proofs that Christ here designed 
by the term everlasting" to convey the idea of endless dura- 
tion, is the historic fact that the Jews, vrith their ideas of the 
immortaUty of the soul, must have so understood it. The Jews 
in Christ's time — all who beheved the soul would exist at all 
after 'death — beheved it would never die. For this fact Jose- 
phus expressly and exphcitly testifies: ''The doctrine of the 



* Rom. xvi 22. Sept. G-en. xxi. 33. Isa. xL 28, etc. 



280 



APPENDIX. 



Essenes is this : That bodies are corruptible, and the matter 
they are made of, not permanent ; but that souls are immortal 
and continue forever. * * * And indeed the Greeks seem 
to me to have followed the same notion, when they allot the 
islands of the Blessed to their brave men, and to the souls of 
the wicked, the region of the ungodly in Hades ; where such 
persons as Sisyphus, Tantalus, and Ixion, and Tityus are pun- 
ished ; which is built on this first supposition that souls are im- 
mortal ; whereby bad men are restrained by the fear and expect- 
ation they are in, that although they should lie concealed in 
this hfe, they should suffer immortal punishment after death." 

Of the Pharisees, Josephus also testifies, " they say that all 
souls are incorruptible, but that the souls of bad men are sub- 
ject to eternal punishment." But the Sadducees take away 
the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punish- 
ments and rewards in Hades.* 

Again, elsewhere, he testifies, " The Pharisees believe that 
souls have an immortal vigor in them ; that under the earth 
there will be rewards or punishments according as they have 
lived virtuously or viciously in this life ; the latter are to be de- 
tained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have 
power to revive and live again. * * * 3^-^ the doctrine of 
the Sadducees is that souls die with the bodies."! 

Such is the testimony of the Jewish historian cotemporary 
with Christ. The sects embracing the doctrine of immortality 
were the great majority of the nation ; those rejecting it, rejected 
a future life altogether. Our Saviour, therefore, in that dis- 
course, must have been understood by those who heard him, as 
meaning, by the term in question, strictly everlasting ; and he 
knew he must be so understood. Of course, using it without 
limitations, he designed to be so understood ; and such must be 
its meaning in the passage. 



* Josephus' Wars of the Jews : Book H. Chap. viii. Sects. 11-14. 
f Antiquities of the Jews : Book XYIII. Chap. i. Sects. 3-4. 



APPENDIX. 



281 



That then it should have here its proper import of ever- 
during, would seem plainly inferrible from the nature of the 
subject from the time and scope of the scene described, from the 
notions prevalent on the theme of discourse amid those to whom 
the description was addressed, and from the definition of the 
term in the context, in apphcation to a subject — the life of the 
righteous — to which none think of applying a restricted signifi- 
cation. Instead, then, of the word everlasting being here re- 
stricted in its natural signification, it appears to us expanded by 
the character of its subject, and by the occasion and the audi- 
tory, to its infinite capacity. 

As predicated of the soul and especially the doom of the soul 
after the last judgment, we may say without begging the ques- 
tion, the terms everlasting and eternal, to the common mind 
and usage, carry the idea of endless duration. For however 
imperfect and unsettled may be the notions of men in regard 
to the immortality of the soul, they do not think of using or 
understanding the terms, eternal and everlasting, in relation to 
it or its future destiny, in a hmited import. The mind natur- 
ally, if admitting the existence of the spirit after death at all, 
conceives of it as among the most enduring of things. Espec- 
ially would a Hmited import be attached to an epithet describing 
\he final doom of the soul, because that doom is the very utter- 
most syllable of its history. It covers the infinite future. Bear- 
ing this, the soul disappears from view forever. jSTo ulterior 
judgment, no reversal of doom is intimated. Every aspect of 
the scene and transaction looks to the everlasting. The person- 
ages with differences of moral character and history, are dis- 
missed from that throne on destinies that shall turn back no 
more. If the scope of any scene or action could sustain in 
common usage the unlimited extent of the time-term employed, 
surely this were such an one. If that doom were not to coA'er 
the unlimited future, and that hfe and punishment were to be 
consummated, and have an end, we should expect, in a professed 
exhibit of man's destinv. som.e intimation of it. 



282 



APPENDIX. 



Moreover, our Lord obviously would not have used, in such 
a case, language which he knew would have been misappre- 
hended, with no explanation or caution, or any intimation at 
all guarding against misconstruction. And certainly he would 
not have done so, knowing as he must, that by the use of the 
same word in the next clause, where none would think of lim- 
iting it, viz., in application to the happy destiny of the righteous, 
he would necessarily be understood by hearers and readers as 
fixing its meaning. According to all rules of fair and perspicu- 
ous speech, the term which applied to the life of the righteous 
in one clause embraces endless being, can not in one imme- 
diately adjacent shrink into finite and measurable date. 

Thirdly. Tms doom implies continuance of being in its ob- 
jects. The words everlasting punishment imply this. This 
might seem too obvious and self-evident for argument. Bat 
some contend that these words may import simply a punishment 
everlasting in its consequences (one from which there shall never 
be a recovery), and may thus be fully satisfied by the annihilation 
of those punished. But that these words have not this meaning 
here, is clear from the following considerations. This is not the 
natural and obvious import of the words ; that import by which, 
according to the laws of sound criticism, we ought to interpret 
language, in the circumstances in which this was uttered, and 
according to which the phrase was unquestionably understood 
by those who heard it. We think we certainly are not mis- 
taken in feeling that everlasting punishment" is not the term 
in which one would naturally have expressed the idea of the 
extinction of being; some other word than "punishment" 
would have been used. Again, that is not the proper meaning 
of the phrase employed. The word translated punishment, 
KoTiaaig^ is a word denoting, not the consequence, but the act 
of punishing. It is a verbal noun, a nomen actionis^ equivalent 
not to an opus operatum (a work operated), but to the operation. 
It indicates not result so much as process. It is stronger than 
the common word rendered punishment, the word employed 



APPE^^DIX. 



283 



"with its adjective by Josephus to indicate eternal or immortal 
punishment (Tificopla). It is more significant than atonement, 
amercement, expiation, penal satisfaction, etc. It corresponds 
more nearly to our word chastisement^ and might not inaptly 
have been rendered J9z^7?2^sAj?z^ instead of punishment. It is a 
noun of infliction. Its prime etymological idea is that of maim- 
ing, cutting, mutilation, and the like. In common usage it im- 
phes conscious suffering in its object. It is the same word which 
is rendered torment in 1 John, iv. 18 ; where it is said, " There 
is no fear in love, because fear hath torment^ This is the only 
other passage exhibiting this word in the New Testament. 
If translated in this manner in the clause under inspection, am- 
biguity of meaning would have been impossible. We regard 
the word, therefore, as implying its proper force, and because 
of the popular behef amid those to whom the word was ad- 
dressed, the conscious existence of its subject. Again, we in- 
fer this doom carries the idea of conscious being, because of the 
adjunct attached to the instrument of the punishment predicated 
(whether in reality or figure is immaterial). That instrument 
or adjunct is called everlasting fire. But why apply the epithet 
everlasting to the agent, unless to convey the idea of everlasting 
action ? and what pertinency in calling the action everlasting, 
if the suffering were not to be so ? It certainly would seem 
frivolous to say the fire was everlasting, but the torment inflicted 
was not so. The only pertinency in the use of this adjective of 
endless duration attached to the penal agent, is found in the 
implication of correspondent duration of the suffering of those 
subjected to its power. The sentencing to a fire which shall 
burn forevermore, would be naturally understood to be a sen- 
tencing to burn in it forevermore. The adjunct were nugatory 
otherwise. So of everlasting fire here ; it were childish to ac- 
cumulate epithets upon the fire for any other end. Would Grod 
attempt to create terror by a mere sonorous and idle play of 
words ? Would our Saviour — would the great Judge — resort 
to a mere trick of language, a childish illusion of the imagination ? 



284 



What matters it to souls absolutely and forever to be burned 
up, whether the fire that consumes them should raven on 
through eternal ages, or is to be quenched with the extinction 
of their own being ? whether they are consumed in a bonfire or 
in the conflagration of worlds ? If I am to be drowned, what 
matters it whether it be in the rivulet or the Atlantic ? It 
surely were unworthy of the awful dignity and truthfulness of 
tlie scene, for the Judge in his sentence before the assembled 
universe, thus to dilate on the everlastingness of the fire, when 
he knew the culprits sentenced would soon be forever beyond 
its burning. Let it burn on forever, it could not reach them. 
What would its endless rage, even should it devour the uni- 
verse, be to them in the bosom of eternal nothing ? Certainly 
the sentence of the last day will not attempt to fi'ighten the 
condemned by a childish play on unreal fears. If the applica- 
tion of the epithet everlasting, to the fire, does not import that 
the lost ones punished by it are to be everlastingly exposed to 
its fury, it would be hard to acquit the final sentence of falsify- 
ing the obvious, designed, and inevitable impression of language, 
by a mere artful equivoque worthy of a Pagan oracle. But the 
scene and the speaker drive such a thought wide as the universe 
aloof 

Suppose the sentence had been, Depart ye cursed, into fire 
that shall burn a hundred years, or a thousand years, who would 
tliink otherwise than that those sentenced were to burn in that 
fire one hundred or one thousand years ? We should all think 
of nothing else than taking an attributive of duration attached 
to the agent of punishment, as an assignment of the date to the 
punishment itself. We could discern no reason for its introduc- 
tion at all if not for this purpose. So in case of the sentence of 
the great day, if the time-term of the fire is not meant to be 
that of its infliction of pain, we can see no reason why it is in- 
troduced here. Surely the eternal judgment were no theme 
nor scene for admitting an artful fetch, by indirection conveying 
a fallacy it shrinks fi:'om directly uttering. And surely he from 



APPENDIX. 



285 



whose lips these words fell — ^who was himself truth and love, 
and in whose mouth guile was never found — would not abuse 
and afflict men with unreal terrors ; and especially by terrors 
which, as is contended, wliile afflicting man, only dishonor Grod. 
So subsequently in applying the epithet everlasting alike to the 
life of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked, in con- 
tinuous clauses, we can not suppose our Lord, in pronouncing 
the irreversible doom, would palter in a double sense of the 
same word, making the life endless, but the penal suffering not 
so. Is everlasting punishment, in the common sense and usage 
of words, simply punishment irreversible f — punishment from 
which there shall be no recovery, irrespective of continuance of 
being ? Does it not imply something felt everlastingly ? Does 
an infliction merely extinctive of existence correspond to its 
common idea ? Should we think of saying of a man shot or 
beheaded, that he departs into everlasting punishment, even 
though there is no recovery from it, and its effects are enduring ? 
Is this a common-sense acceptation of the phrase ? Would not 
the common mind understand more, and must it not have un- 
derstood more by this when Christ uttered it ? A punishment 
which the victim should forever suffer and from which he 
snould find no rescue, nor release, nor reprieve ? Punishment 
continuing imphes existence continuing ; everlasting punish- 
ment, everlasting existence. In common parlance you would 
no more speak of the punishment of the annihilated than of the 
uncreated. 

Again, the words " everlasting punishment" imply everlasting 
continuance of being, because our Saviour must have heen con- 
scious they conveyed that signification to those listening to him^ 
and his use of them, knowing they would be thus understood, 
makes him responsible for intending that signification. The 
J ews, with the notions entertained among them of the future 
destiny of the soul, could have interpreted them in no other 
way. The theory of extinction after judgment, had no place 
among them ; the penal sufferings of the wicked, if there were 



286 



APPENDIX. 



any at all hereafter, were without end. But it is an established 
canon of interpretation, which construes the words of a fair and 
truthful speaker in the meaning in which he is conscious, while 
uttering them, they will be understood by the hearer. And 
evidently the Jewish mind, hearing words in customary use to 
indicate a common behef, with no indications of departure from 
that usage, could only understand by eternal punishment an 
immortal woe. This Jesus kneY7, and this he must have in- 
tended. 

We think, then, our three propositions are proven in case of 
this text. It relates to the future doom of the wicked, affirms 
of that doom, eternity, and implies the continued conscious ex- 
istence of its objects, viz., wicked souls. 

This is the most full, formal, and methodic statement of the 
process and sentence of the final judgment to be found in the 
Scriptures, and taken in all its aspects, may be regarded as not 
less, certainly, than any other, a text entitled to rule on this 
topic. We pause here to inquire, then, whether the above pas- 
sage, to one looking at it by itself, and bringing to its examina- 
tion no theory to be established, and no prejudgments to be 
sustained, would not seem perfectly decisive of the whole ques- 
tion ; so plain and so unambiguous, indeed, that there could be 
no mistaking its intent ? Dr. Post, 



THE END. 



^0^ 



0 



■<^^ 0 J? \ 




c 0^ 



<^ ^ 0 n \ ^ A 



(A vA ' " k 





Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
^ ^ ^"^^ Treatment Date: May 2006 

' ^ • ^ ' ' >^^^^ . ^ , ^ PreservationTechnologie: 

^ ^^^^'5^^^'' ^ WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIO 
5:^ S^. ^ 111 Thomson Park Drive 

~ Cranberry TownshiD. PA 16066 



A' ^ ' 



I ii i<^iv/\ji«3S 

PRESERVATION 
1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724) 779-21.11 



-4 .\ 



-it 



0 N 0 



,-0' ^ , . 



,0 o 



.0^ 



.0^ • ^ ^ 0 / 



